Taxes are the new climate forcing. I kid you not.
From the NYT, columnist Gail Collins:
But a carbon tax/fee is the key to controlling climate change. That or just letting the next generation worry about whether the Jersey Shore is going to wind up lapping Trenton. Currently, majority sentiment in Congress is to hope for the best and pass the baton to the grandchildren. (When it comes to rising-sea-level denial, the champion may be North Carolina, where the Legislature has voted to base state coastal management policy on historic trends rather than anything the current experts have to say. “This means that even though North Carolina scientists predict 39 inches of sea-level rise within the century, North Carolina, by its own law, is only allowed to prepare for 8. King Canute would be so proud,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island in a recent speech.)
…
It’s sort of ironic. These are the same folks who constantly seed their antideficit speeches with references to our poor, betrayed descendants. (“This is a burden our children and grandchildren will have to bear.”) Don’t you think the children and grandchildren would appreciate being allowed to hang onto the Arctic ice cap?
=============================================================
I dunno, my kids haven’t used the Arctic icecap lately, I’m not sure they’d miss it with all the clutter in their rooms.
Read the whole silly essay here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/28/opinion/collins-cooling-on-warming.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Officially from the Met Office:
March 2013 is coldest since 1962
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-March.htm
Met Office: Global warming means that the UK will have climate of the Costa del Sol.
Reality: UK’s climate at the moment is the ‘Costa del Svalbard’.
“But a carbon tax/fee is the key to controlling climate change.”
“Life finds a way.” Make energy more expensive, and those who can’t afford it will scavenge for less clean energy sources like wood or coal to heat their homes. A carbon tax will do nothing to control climate change. It will only make the masses poorer, their lives harder, and enrich those who control the tax, which is the real reason they want the tax.
From the NYT, columnist Gail Collins:
“When it comes to rising-sea-level denial, the champion may be North Carolina, where the Legislature has voted to base state coastal management policy on historic trends rather than anything the current experts have to say.”
The state government of North Carolina is overwhelmingly Republican. Clearly Collins is making a political statement by linking the term “denial” to those Republicans.
Ian W says:
March 28, 2013 at 9:21 am
… Methinks you have “the NYT, columnist Gail Collins: ” confused with regular commenter here “Gail Combs” this may prove a little upsetting to the latter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not if I can have her pay check deposited in my bank. /sarc>
@ur momisugly GAIL COLLINS
=======
I’m starting to have trouble getting out of bed, some mornings.
Please tell me what motivates you, unless, it is only the demons in your head.
Is the belief in catatrosphic AGW science, ideology, religion, of mere hysteria? How does one go about answering such a convoluted rhetorical question? Can a rhetorical question be satisfactorily answered with another rhetorical question? What would Aristotle believe? Personally, and I say this with all sincerity – as always – I go with hysteria – mass hysteria of the ‘mass’ kind – not Newtonian mass, but rather popular mass, as in mass hysteria. Have I made myself perfectly clear?
Cnut? Wasn’t that the only poley bear who drowned, sacrificing himself for The Cause in front of a crowd of Berliners? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knut_(polar_bear)
“Preaching to the converted…”
What I don’t get is what the vast majority of climate warmhysterics think is in it for them. Do they see themselves continuing to enjoy their current lifestyle, barely hampered, with maybe $5 extra on their electricity bill each month? Do they imagine that the fallout from the massive imposition of carbon tax/cap & trade/whatever today’s gov’t intervention is being called, which they are shrieking lies and screaming invective & skewing data in order to achieve in the name of “doing something about climate change,” will not apply to them, will not really affect them, will not really turn them into poverty-stricken hoboes just like the rest of us? Do they imagine that their computers will produce secret slots out of which will pour gold coins to reward them for “fighting climate change?” It’ll be too late by then, of course, but I do wish someone from their side would be willing to field the question.
I did. And I’m sorry.
The last I checked, the most radical of the estimates for NC sea rise was nowhere near 39″. That 39″ (1 meter) was chosen by the State environmentalists, who wanted to extend their power and control over a bunch of land. The actual rise is even less than the 8″ quoted. It would be *nice* if the nice NYTimes blogger lady got her facts straight, but I realize that “extremism in the pursuit of liberal causes is no vice” in the Times.
What sort of delusion leads anyone to think that “carbon taxes” could control climate? These people must be seriously mentally ill.
Wanted to write in the comment but of course NYT comments are quickly closed once the communist elite have the proper thought accounted for.
However must disagree with say Boston12GS and some others. The NYT has for over 100 years brought to the masses a direct line of information from the most genocidal, racist, socialist filth that have ever walked this planet. Its good to keep tabs on what they are up too and how they view the world… for when the NYT is angry or whining about something you know someone somewhere is doing something good for the world. Plus you always know which republicans are communist because the NYTs likes them(ie mccain).
Carbon taxes have certainly forced the political climate in Oz. Labor has fried.
I will not even do the NYT crossword,
but I love ‘ New York Times = monkeys write’
thank you Jorge
Alfred
I read the Collins piece and it made me want to scream. What kills me is the way she denigrates as deniers anyone who has any doubt whatsoever about the strong program in climate change remediation. Her hubris, as well as her scientific illiteracy, is simply astounding. But that isn’t the bad part, the ad hominems. What’s bad is I read people like her, and the hundreds of smug responders to her twittering, all of them claiming they know with certainty something that is anything but certain, and I realize there is no middle ground. We are talking here about two visions for the future that are diametrically opposed. It’s a zero sum game. One side wins, the other loses.
Arrrrgh. A woman whose knowledge of science and technology would make a thimble look like an arena gets to castigate as fools and deniers people who for very scientifically legitimate reasons question her stance on climate change. Even the term makes me cringe.
The thinking here is simple. Who cares what out grandchildren have to deal with. What are they going do to us … come an pee on our graves? Bwahahahaha
We are in the ME ME ME generation … nothing else matters but MEH!
This reminded me of something. Years ago i saw a video clip of Hillary Clinton when she was 1st lady testifying before Congress about her health care plan. To the best of my memory, in the context of a 1,000% tax on ammo, she was asked if she wanted to control peoples behavior through taxes. Her answer was, “I would if I could.”
It’s not about “controlling climate change”. It’s about Control. Period.
But taking in more taxes would endanger the deficit spending that Krugman sees as necessary – as it would reduce the deficit; a bad thing in Krugman’s view.
Here’s one effect of a carbon tax from Oz (March 18, 2013):
(blockquote)(b)Australian Securities & Investments Commission reports record company closures, many blame carbon tax(/b)
http://www.news.com.au/business/companies/australian-securities-investments-commission-reports-record-company-closures-many-blame-carbon-tax/story-fnda1bsz-1226599283585#ixzz2Os3OXKOk
A spokesman for Industry Minister Greg Combet, who is also the Climate Change Minister, said “…. The government is using carbon price revenue to assist manufacturers to reduce energy costs and become more competitive by investing in energy efficient.”(/blockquote)
Note how the Government knows best by removing funds from industry using a tax then return it to industry to counter the effects of the same tax.
Our Idiocracy in action which is why we are looking forward to an election on Sep 14.
The rather more revealing back story to King Canute (I use the English spelling as he was an english king at the time) was not that he commanded the tide to halt, but that he showed that no matter what his flattering lords told him about how powerful he was – he could not. It is an excellent example of not believing what flatterers say about you.
In modern day parlance you could translate this two ways.
Man can’t control nature.
or one I like better.
Believe the historical data not the models of the future
Canute was the original skeptic.
What is going on here?
At 9.15 Alex Wade posts the following: Note the Gail COLLINS
alexwade says:
March 28, 2013 at 9:15 am
It is funny. Gail Collins claims North Carolina is delusional for using actual data instead of unproven and inaccurate models generated by experts who have an agenda. People like Gail Collins takes whatever the team of pro-AGW “experts” has to say as gospel. If the team said that water isn’t wet, people like Gail Collins would believe it and call others who believe differently crazy.
Then Ian W claims that Alex named Gail Combs? Was this cut and pasted, or copied?
Ian W says:
March 28, 2013 at 9:21 am
alexwade says:
March 28, 2013 at 9:15 am
It is funny. Gail Combs claims North Carolina is delusional for using actual data instead of unproven and inaccurate models generated by experts who have an agenda. People like Gail Combs takes whatever the team of pro-AGW “experts” has to say as gospel. If the team said that water isn’t wet, people like Gail Combs would believe it and call others who believe differently crazy.
Methinks you have “the NYT, columnist Gail Collins: ” confused with regular commenter here “Gail Combs” this may prove a little upsetting to the latter.
Then Alex Wade apologises! Has someone been editing these posts?
alexwade says:
March 28, 2013 at 12:16 pm
Ian W says:
March 28, 2013 at 9:21 am
Methinks you have “the NYT, columnist Gail Collins: ” confused with regular commenter here “Gail Combs” this may prove a little upsetting to the latter.
I did. And I’m sorry.
My head is hurting.
Steve T
Cue the Globe & Mail in Canada… advocating for Carbon taxes and all those who support the idea.
Steve T says:
March 28, 2013 at 3:09 pm
What is going on here?
At 9.15 Alex Wade posts the following: Note the Gail COLLINS
Moderation in all things 🙂
I think after the initial post, my comment and Gail Combs’ reply – the moderator corrected Alex’s post. That made the logic of our posts a little less than obvious 😉
@John Trigge – and the grievous effects it is having in Australia –
Surely Ms. Collins is hoping for similar results from a carbon tax here: companies going out of business, people losing their jobs, the cost of everything – not just energy, because everything else moves on energy – goes through the roof, and maybe her profiteer friends will give her a bonus for making it happen. One would surmise that like most of the leftists behind AGW, she is wealthy enough to not feel the effect of those higher cost, and her job as propagandist for the NYT won’t be in any dnager
Ian W says:
March 28, 2013 at 3:28 pm
Steve T says:
March 28, 2013 at 3:09 pm
What is going on here?
At 9.15 Alex Wade posts the following: Note the Gail COLLINS
Moderation in all things 🙂
I think after the initial post, my comment and Gail Combs’ reply – the moderator corrected Alex’s post. That made the logic of our posts a little less than obvious 😉
**************************************************************************************************
Thanks for the explanation. I didn’t think Mods made corrections/changes without some indication on this blog. Certainly I’ve not seen any evidence of such in the past three and a half years.
Steve T