Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
My thanks again to Dr. Jane Orient, Jeremy Snavely, and the Doctors for Disaster Preparedness (DDP). I previously described how they invited me to Knoxville to speak at the DDP conference.
However, they’ve now outdone themselves and posted my speech online, and have my further thanks for doing so. Here’s the video, featuring me cleverly disguised in a coat and tie.
As I remarked in my previous post, I stole shamelessly from my past writings to make up my speech. My basic theme was, “First, Do No Harm”.
I went to the Conference thinking I’d talk about science, and I had a bunch of Powerpoint slides and everything. But then I thought better of it, and I junked my prepared speech and put together another one entirely, no slides, just stories and ideas.
I asked for questions after my presentation, but mostly what I got instead were mini-speeches, although some of them were interesting and relevant.
Best to all,
w.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Willis: DDP is a pretty cool group aren’t they? Their meetings are always interesting and the topics quite varied and wide ranging. I gave a lecture to their Southern California Chapter on dirty bomb preparedness which was well received and enjoyable. I donated my services to calibrate their radiation instruments for awhile and participated in a couple of their exercises. They provide a heck of a service when disasters occur, but few know about them.
Well done I enjoyed it very much. Keep at it.
One “questioner’s” mini speech brought focus to the regressivity of carbon based taxes. The short form of his idea is this:
Virtually everyone agrees that sales taxes are regressive, to the point that in some government areas essential basic goods are made tax free or at least lower tax rates.
But take two dresses. One is $50. One is $1000. Clearly these dresses are made for different buyers.
If we use a 5% sales tax, then the $50 dollar dress costs $55 and the $1000 dollar dress costs $1050. To the poor, that $5 increase in the low priced dress can mean skipping one or more meals, but the $50 increase in the $1000 dress is unlikely to change the habits of those who would buy it.
But if we choose to a Cap-And-Trade or Carbon-Tax system and tax items based upon their carbon content or carbon footprint, then we making a super-regressive tax. The $50 dress and the $1000 dress both have the same carbon content. What then if the carbon tax makes the $50 dress $55 and the same carbon tax makes the $1000 dress $1005? The poor are hurt most, the rich feel it not.
To add insult to injury $1000 dress might also carry a green-energy label so that it is exempt from the carbon tax. Energy that is green only because of tax subsidies, some of which are sales taxes, that make it possible.
From Gail Combs: 1/10/14 12:49 am
Also from Gail Combs: 3/6/14 3:30 am
Correction to my 8/18 12:03 am
If we use a 5% sales tax, then the $50 dollar dress costs
$55$52.50 and the $1000 dollar dress costs $1050. To the poor, that $2.50 increase in the low priced dress can mean skipping one ormoretwo meals.The Proponents of a Carbon Tax have an answer to its super-regressivity: Make the Carbon-Tax revenue neutral by subsidizing the poor.
A Carbon Tax would be a most efficient tax to collect, (if you don’t count people cutting down trees for firewood). Efficiency of Collection does not make tax just or fair.
Even if one can actually account for a monetary harm done by every ton of carbon extracted from where it was sequestered in the earth, the morality of the tax would depend upon where the lucre flowed. There would be no Invisible Hand to “advance the interests of the society”. No. There would be a great many hands on the revenue stream from a Carbon Tax —- hands that would be neither Invisible nor Transparent.
Of course, the Americans are fond of saying “No taxation without representation.” and also “one man one vote”. So why are votes not proportional to tax paid! Or alternatively, if you want to keep one man one vote, tax should be apportioned equally to all citizens. i.e. $1.4trillion / 350million = $4000 per person.
Thank you once again, Willis.
Stopping coal fired generation in the world is immoral.
Very well done, Willis … I had imagined you as a larger man 😉
Stephen Rasey says:
August 18, 2014 at 12:50 am
“…Even if one can actually account for a monetary harm done by every ton of carbon extracted from where it was sequestered in the earth, the morality of the tax would depend upon where the lucre flowed….”
/////////////////////////////
Tax is neither fair nor moral, and in most instances it is unfair and immoral.
There is no true democracy in the West, and as long as the political elite control the list of candidates, there never will be government by the people for the people.
At best, all ‘we’ can hope for is that those in political power are held accountable for their actions, not just at the ballot box, but more importantly criminally accountable. That will be a long, hard and slow battle, but it will be the only way that better decision making will be made. It is even more important to bring NGOs under that umbrella since they exercise significant power without democratic accountability, and have never been voted in by the citizens.
Hi Willis. Nice to put a face and a voice to the wonderful articles I’ve read from you here on WUWT.
I think I probably got the audio fairly correct but my visual impression was different… You’re missing the cape.;)
Looking forward to more.
Regards, Eamon.
here I was thinking DDP were something along the lines of Médecins Sans Frontières sending medical help where needed.
Instead I find it is group based on the final scenes of Doctor Strangelove
Strangelove’s plan for post-nuclear war survival involves living underground with a 10:1 female-to-male ratio to live in deep mineshafts in order to escape the radiation,
General “Buck” Turgidson then comes up with the immortal:
“Mr. President, we must not allow a mineshaft gap!”
another fantastic presentation willis ,i really enjoyed that. my family has a house in the philippines and my younger brother and sister are half scottish ,half filipino . the filipino people are some of the friendliest in the world ,and manilla is one of the few large cities in the world where i would feel safe walking anywhere as a foreigner .this is based on a similar experience to yourself in my early twenties.
the fact it is one of,if not the most corrupt countries in the world,and at one time was the most dangerous place in the world to be an investigative journalist is a paradox i will never understand.
by the way,did you ever try the balut ? it took two days for the taste to leave my mouth,and very little could ever persuade me to try it again.
on the commentators after your presentation, i really did not know how bad the energy disruption situation was becoming in the united states .
I enjoyed that, thanks Willis.
Great talk Willis, thank you for posting.
You’re a ‘warm’ speaker, Willis. Well worth listening to.
You asked: “What shall we do about Climate Change?”
Well, at the risk of repeating myself – and in a way, agreeing with your ‘no regrets’ strategy – I like to think we should use the simple strategy outlined by the great (late) British author and plawright, Keith Waterhouse (who, incidentally, wrote in partnership with the well-named Willis Hall). He said:
Darn it: ‘Playwright’!
Sorry, Willis, you are rambling. Nowt to do with AGW, and switched off after 5 minures. if i had paid for that lecture, I would have demanded my money back.
Spot on Willis, thank you.
Good stuff Willis – thank you!
Wow. Willis wasn’t anything like I thought. But he was just as eloquent in speech as he’s been in writ. He certainly made his point. I’d like to see/hear more of Mr. Eschenbach. His articles are well read, but I like what has to actually say.
There appears to be a lot of common sense being applied by Willis.
Alarmists will not take to kindly to that.
Streetcred says:
August 18, 2014 at 1:28 am
Very well done, Willis … I had imagined you as a larger man 😉
Willis is a larger man.
An excellent presentation Willis!
I do confess to being surprised. My prior mental image of Willis Eschenbach was that of a burly grizzled square jawed tough fisherman adventurer through life. Likely wearing Duofold woolies or Woolrich plaids.
I’ve corrected that mental image now thanks to your video. Instead my mental Willis image is currently a geeky looking tough wiry sharp as a razor guy; not one whit less manly though.
Many of us baby boomer generation, whatever nationality, were brought up by parents who lived a life very similar to those you’ve described Willis. What many of the younger generations fail to grasp is that in spite of appearances they are not far from a life seeking shelter, warmth and any food for a meal.
Right now in America there are unemployed who have fallen through any measurement of unemployment. Whether living in an old car or some relative’s attic or basement or building a cardboard shack, these ‘American’ poor are just as desperate seeking refuge from weather.
I only add these comments in to remind folks that whereas everyone in many nations are very poor there are equally poor people in most if not all nations.
I love your phrase, “First, do no harm!”.
I just saw the whole talk. Inspired and inspiring. Poignant, urgent, a devastating critique of carbo-socialism that turns out to be a war on the poor.
A good call to focus on real people rather than the science. The science of squabbling over fractions of degrees or mm of sea level is insignificant compared to the daily struggle for life of Helena, of the African farmer, or the Solomon Islander.
The new “liberals” are indeed free of either head or heart.
Also from the questions its good to see signs of mobilizing resistance.