UK Researchers: Tax Food to Reduce Climate Change

Oxford Trinity College High Table

Oxford Trinity College High Table. I doubt these professors have anything to fear from a food tax. By Winky from Oxford, UK (Flickr) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

A group of researchers in Oxford University, England have suggested that imposing a massive tax on carbon intensive foods – specifically protein rich foods like meat and dairy – could help combat climate change.

Pricing food according to its climate impacts could save half a million lives and one billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions

Taxing greenhouse gas emissions from food production could save more emissions than are currently generated by global aviation, and lead to half a million fewer deaths from chronic diseases, according to a new study published in Nature Climate Change.

The study, conducted by a team of researchers from the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food at the University of Oxford and the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington DC, is the first global analysis to estimate the impacts that levying emissions prices on food could have on greenhouse gas emissions and human health.

The findings show that about one billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions could be avoided in the year 2020 if emissions pricing of foods were to be implemented, more than the total current emissions from global aviation. However, the authors stress that due consideration would need to be given to ensuring such policies did not impact negatively on low income populations.

“Emissions pricing of foods would generate a much needed contribution of the food system to reducing the impacts of global climate change,” said Dr Marco Springmann of the Oxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food, who led the study. “We hope that’s something policymakers gathering this week at the Marrakech climate conference will take note of.”

Much of the emissions reduction would stem from higher prices and lower consumption of animal products, as their emissions are particularly high. The researchers found that beef would have to be 40% more expensive globally to pay for the climate damage caused by its production. The price of milk and other meats would need to increase by up to 20%, and the price of vegetable oils would also increase significantly. The researchers estimate that such price increases would result in around 10% lower consumption of food items that are high in emissions. “If you’d have to pay 40% more for your steak, you might choose to have it once a week instead of twice,” said Dr Springmann.

The results indicate that the emissions pricing of foods could, if appropriately designed, be a health-promoting climate-change mitigation policy in high-income, middle-income, and most low-income countries. Special policy attention would be needed in those low-income countries where a high fraction of the population is underweight, and possibly for low-income segments within countries.

Read more:

The abstract of the study;

Mitigation potential and global health impacts from emissions pricing of food commodities

Marco Springmann, Daniel Mason-D’Croz, Sherman Robinson, Keith Wiebe, H. Charles J. Godfray, Mike Rayner & Peter Scarborough

The projected rise in food-related greenhouse gas emissions could seriously impede efforts to limit global warming to acceptable levels. Despite that, food production and consumption have long been excluded from climate policies, in part due to concerns about the potential impact on food security. Using a coupled agriculture and health modelling framework, we show that the global climate change mitigation potential of emissions pricing of food commodities could be substantial, and that levying greenhouse gas taxes on food commodities could, if appropriately designed, be a health-promoting climate policy in high-income countries, as well as in most low- and middle-income countries. Sparing food groups known to be beneficial for health from taxation, selectively compensating for income losses associated with tax-related price increases, and using a portion of tax revenues for health promotion are potential policy options that could help avert most of the negative health impacts experienced by vulnerable groups, whilst still promoting changes towards diets which are more environmentally sustainable.

Read more:

This proposal, from a group of people who have probably never missed a meal in their lives, is totally obscene. High income countries often have a lot of poor people who would be hard hit by increases in the price of food.

Needlessly exacerbating the risk poor people don’t get enough to eat, especially children and pregnant mothers, who are especially vulnerable to adverse health impacts from lack of protein in their diet – if this ghastly proposal is ever implemented, future generations will look upon it as a crime against humanity.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of



Agreed. Why do anything? Climate has been changing long before mankind walked the face of the earth. More taxes on anything will do nothing; except cause more problems and grief for said mankind. .


What caused the previous changes?

Melissa Wells

Yet they keep importing millions of refugees that will need to be fed. It makes no sense.


Follow the money. Who exactly will be administering the expenditures of all this tax revenue, and who will be having their pockets lined by the same people. Sounds just like the kind of dirty dishonest scam that Al Gore and the Clintons would be mixed up in.

Considable environmental benefits could be gained by only buying local food in season. And not buying bottled water.
However, the first would seriously Impoverish growers in third world countries who export their food ,with all the attendant air miles, to rich countries. However, curtailing bottled water would primarily impact only on western consumers with more money than sense who disdain much cheaper and environmentally friendly tap water

Ross King

This says it all:
Climate Change is anthropogenic.
But Climate has been changing since way before mankind took its first steps.
Therefore, Climate Change is not anthropogenic.

‘being a geologist, you are just right. The gulf and the oceans how been coming up for 15,000years or more. The magnetic north has been moving, and there is the continental drift. All of this is causing the climate change, not man. This can be seen while driving by the road cuts, which show the different formations (climate change)

It is called seasons don’t you know? Also, because corporate greed has set world wide agendas and legitimate behavior, societies have developed an unreal expectation to consume out of season food. We are NOT civilized and need to tear ourselves away from the false paradigm of over consumption of natural resources.


The earth’s atmosphere has changed and is continually evolving. At one time approximately 2.5 to 3 Billion years ago it was TOXIC to humans, and the real point here is there were NO humans around. It will continue to evolve and change. The earth has gone through many cycles of warming and cooling – Ice age anyone? There have been many Ice ages, in fact the Sun is growing quiet, with less sun spot activity. We may see the effects around 2025 and on. I wonder what the climate wizards will tell the kings then. Al Gore’s climate change is NOTHING but a massive scam to bilk money (in the form of more taxes) out of every nation’s middle class.

Stephen Hawkins

Actually the climate changes four times a year. Winter, spring summer and fall. Good enough for God, good enough for me. Talk about Fake News….you guys are under arrest.


Its called population control


more beardy, sandal-wearing hippies try to force their hair shirt wearing worldview onto everyone else by legal imposition.
If you think your life style is so great then just present its benefits and convince others to take it up.
If you try to lie and cheat to pretend that this is a morally superior “save the planet” , “save the future of the human race” issue, then screw you .

Jan Conroy

If all First World nations sent home all Third World aliens who have illegally immigrated to the First World you would cut greenhouse gas emissions by billions of tons per year in perpetuity. And, if First World countries only allowed legal immigration from nations with similar per capita carbon footprints greenhouse gas emissions would stabilize. So, if those concerned about greenhouse gas emissions really wanted to do something to stabilize these emissions, they would change immigration laws first before looking to import millions of Third Worlders into the First World where their care and feeding increases greenhouse gas emissions exponentially. Example: A Guatemalan has a per capita carbon footprint of one ton per year in Guatemala, but when they come to the US illegally their carbon footprint increases to 20+ tons per year. Send them back and global carbon production drops by 19 tons per year. Send back millions of illegal aliens and you reduce global carbon significant.

never give

Its all about the money, plain and simple in my opinion thats why they shout down any other opinion than theirs.


Yes, Greg, with nutjobs like this in the u.k. Is it any wonder that the brexit vote turned out the way it did?

You got it right. These UK elites don’t even understand Econ 1A:
1. Government is force

2. Good ideas do not have to be forced on others

3. Bad ideas should not be forced on others

4. Freedom is necessary for the difference between good ideas and bad ideas to be revealed

These UK elites don’t seem to understand science, or how the free market works, or why citizens in free market countries are far wealthier than those in socialist countries (eg: S. Korea vs the Norks; E. Germany vs W. Germany, etc.)
Or, maybe the elites really do understand. But they’re parasites living off the productive, taxpaying proletariat, so maybe they’re just using the repeatedly debunked ‘carbon’ scare to keep ruling them — and also, to reward their upper crust cronies; the ones that always seem to ‘win’ those juicy gov’t windmill contracts…

El Tigre

Yes, but it gives the politicians MORE MONEY. The love of money is the root of all evil, you know.


Of course it makes sense – if you are trying to create chaos. Controling food prices effectively controls food. Bring in a few million “refugees” (terrorists included) and give them generous welfare benefits to help overload the system. Then sit back and watch what happens.

Mr. Natural

It’s not about the climate. It’s about controlling the people.

Daisy hill

Truth climate changes and ice shifts. Liars are eco nazis

The globalists are trying to tax anything they can to gain control of everything and everyone, and we need to be alert to their scam. They almost had us with the man made climate change hoax (taxing air) but we survived. Now they want to tax food. What’s next, taxing dirt? Or clothes? Water? …there’s no end to these liboons and libots trying to tax us into one world communism.


Richard Smith

It’s all for money and power. Just a pack of communist thieves.


Being able to buy fresh fruits and vegetables out of season has improved the health of many.


Joe, everything is the fault of corporate greed????
It’s corporate greed that forces people to want food out of season? Are you sure that’s the lunacy you want to run with?
Regardless, who gets to decide what the proper level of “resource utilization” is? You? Al Gore?


Population Control!


What did H. L. Mencken say? “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”

Craig H.

I don’t know why people will not believe
in the Geological History of our Planet. This climate change has been going on since the creation on the Planet. I think all that this report is telling us is to become Vegans. I think we , humans, are causing a lot more pollution than ever before, however I do not feel that is the main problem concerning climate change. Here along the eastern coast of the US, we used to be 100 feet under water, about 5-600 years ago the water began to recede as the polar caps enlarged and moved the coast about 90 miles east. It is now moving back to the west as many small islands that were above water 50 years ago are underwater now.


The liberals are going mad.GOD controls the climate not man end there is nothing man can do about it.

+100 Noes.
Sparing food groups known to be beneficial for health from taxation, selectively compensating for income losses associated with tax-related price increases,”…
Can anybody see the potential for crony capitalism here?
Reduce the tax on California oranges because, in the opinion of the EPA, they have more sustainable growing methods.
Eggs are bad…no they’re good; use margarine…no use butter; eat beef…no eat more lamb, but sheep destroy the environment…etc.
Would a politician use the tax code to reward and punish at will?
Does a goose go barefoot?

Bigger than you

This is oppressive big government crony socialism!


“Can anybody see the potential for crony capitalism here?”
Certainly! All of the people pushing this abomination can, as they lick their chops and do that little thing with their hands like Monty Burns and say, “Eeeeexcellllent.”

JB Say

Not the potential for cronyism. The absolute certainty of cronyism and wealth transfers from everybody to well connected corporatists.

Robert of Ottawa

Can anybody see the potential for crony capitalism here?
That is precisely the intent of the Warmistas. Many people are profiting from the swindlemills and subsidy farms, not to mention carbon credits.


The authors themselves admit that their policy would result in millions fewer deaths. But wait a minute. The people who didn’t die would need to keep on eating, thereby INCREASING CO2 emissions. Sounds like a classic case of unintended consequences to me.

And they’d put a Lois Lerner type in charge of it all.


Most likely for genetic reasons many people would not survive if deprived of meat and dairy products. Or many people can’t survive on a vegetarian diet due to genetic factors.
Women and children need calcium.
Try taking ice cream away from North Americans and see what will happen!


“…could save half a million lives and one billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions”.
Just how do you save lives when the plan is to starve citizens of nutrition and diminish heating and cooling systems … hmmm?

I know what you mean when you say “Crony Capitalism” but that phrase is in opposition to itself. Cronyism is favoritism in the markets and by definition can not be Capitalist.
In fact it would be socialist and more precisely Fascist.

Does a bear crap in the woods, if a tree falls in the woods what sound does it make? and can we save the tree from falling? We will slove all of these problems for a little extra tax money.


Barbara, babies need sufficient fat intake for their brains to develop properly.
There’s a reason why whole milk has so much fat in it. (Mother’s milk as well.)


Does a goose go barefoot?

Only when it goose steps.

These people need to be knocked upside the head. Or maybe that’s the problem. Maybe Mommy dearest dropped them on their heads when a child. Don’t know for sure, but one way or the other some brain damage is involved, or called for. Sheesh these people are quite stupid!

You’re correct. Something has gone very wrong with our collective abilities to think logically.


The only stupid people are the ones who let them get away with this.


EARTHJUSTICE, Nov.18, 2016
‘Can Your Diet Help Keep Climate Change At Bay?’
Same thing being promoted in the U.S.


EARTHJUSTICE, June 8, 2016
‘We Disrupted the Energy System – Let’s Tackle the Food System, Too’
A little more information.


William, they are thinking very logically. However their goal is their own improvement, not yours.


This reflects a penchant for the UN ‘double benefit’ philosophy (Label CO2 a pollutant = garner a tax and reduce AGW), only the insanity of the faux-intelligentsia have morphed this into quintuple benefit:
Label ‘food’ an environmental problem = garner a tax, reduce AGW, reduce the population, implement WHO public health policies, lengthen the tax-span of the surviving population.

george e. smith

Let’s get ALL of the carbon out of ALL foods.
People should learn to eat rocks.


There is carbon in rocks.


Rocks that don’t have carbon. Lots of rocks do.


Get ready for Soylent Green.


I wonder if the oxford researchers considered in their calculations the outgassing of all at the bottom of the economic food chain that will starve to death as a consequence of the higher cost of food. They will bear the burden of the environmental success.


Or just put their policy suggestions in place and stand back while people start throwing rocks.
Long before climate science became a poster child for what is wrong in science today, health science, particularly with regard to nutritional science, was blazing a trail into the jungle of junk science. So it shouldn’t come as a surprise that people who believe in junk climate science jump whole heartedly into junk nutritional science.

Robert of Ottawa

Only carbon-free rocks 🙂

Rhoda R

But…but…but SALT is BAD for you!


But carbonaceous rocks are so tasty.

george e. smith

Kristen; don’t eat carbon rocks.

There are lots of minerals and salts in rocks. Plus there are old recipes for stone soup.
Perhaps the Oxford dons and donessas’ should eat a week of stone soup meals. Don’t forget, they’ll tax the protein and fat rich grubs and beetles too.

michael hart

Carbon and rocks? Try Carbondale Short Bus. This video rocks, action from 1:00 onward.

I am damn glad I do not live in the UK. They are getting more socialist than old Russia. Let’s see now 40 % increase on zero would be acceptable

And here in the US, if Hillary had won the election, we would be the Socialist States Of America. The Democrat party has taken over and silence the socialist party of America. And if thy need help Bernie Sanders would fill the void.

Dr. Don Rhudy

Man-caused climate, environmental sustainability—all BS! We must remember who came up with this. Leftists, whose only interest is controlling people.


The effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was discovered in the 1800’s before the industrial revolution.


Fly, the Industrial Revolution began in the late 1700s with the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, et al. It was well underway during the 1800s.

george e. smith

The Industrial revolution had nothing to do with the discovery of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Lil Lyn

Controlling people and making money. This proposal won’t save any carbon emissions, but certainly WILL benefit big agra (the small guys will be taxed out of the market). Reducing the amount of beef available will ensure that only the wealthy have beef. And finally (before I /rant off), who can afford beef NOW twice a week? I’m lucky if I can afford it once a month! Chuck Roast (used to be considered one of the least desirable cuts of meat) … $14.99/pound. Let’s not get talking a nice ribeye or ny strip!


Fly, the ability of CO2 to absorb in the infrared spectrum was discovered in the 1800’s. It’s impact on the climate are still highly speculative.


Typical liberal thoughtfullness for the poor.


Let them eat cake.


Get ready to take it up the shorts, England! Follow the money trail, because someone is making a buck off all this crap. Faked stats, caught time and time again. Outright lies. Arrogant bastards. They don’t know their arse from a hole in the wall! It’s now or never, UK!!!

El Tigre

I understand Al Gore lives pretty high on the hog.

Stanley Wright

And to think global warming was judged on 3 trees in the old Soviet Union. I smell a dead rat put there by the communists. Yes, I don’t believe we have anything to fear from the farts of us humans or our dogs, cats or cows. One volcano puts out more global warming than my truck even on a bad day.

a more effective step along that path would be to tax breath. how about humans being taxed based on how often and how deeply they exhale that evil, polar bear killing, carbon dioxide. little kids with smaller lungs would be taxed less. same as the crusted up lungs of older, lifetime tobacco smokers.
dogs, cats and other critters taxed based on lung capacity and respiration rate. the fat cat, 1% wealthiest citizens would have the most bambinos. and the largest dogs as pets. same as the gas guzzler cars should have higher cost license plates.


“dogs, cats and other critters taxed based on lung capacity and respiration rate.”
We will be eating them along with the wildlife ???


I’ve read the earlier version of this research written by George Orwell. He called his Animal Farm.

Brent Hargreaves

Yes, how do these clowns have the effrontery to call themselves “researchers”? Research used to mean something tangible.

again, a far more effective plan would be to tax “breath”. a human or critter that exhaled more often and deeper than another, exhales more of that evil, polar bear killing, carbon dioxide.
children with small lung capacities and the adults with crusted up lungs form years of tobacco and other substance smoking would be taxed less. 1% wealthiest citizens could have more bambinos and larger pets. same as owners of gas guzzler cars should pay higher license plate fees.


Oh Hell NO

This is another indication that the ‘climate change’ movement is just another excuse to separate citizens from their money. A massive tax on food hurts the poor worst of all, as do many well-intentioned leftist policies.

These people are absolutely blind to the fact that they are NO DIFFERENT than the National Socialists and Communists in their devotion to subjecting everyone to their utopian vision of how a “proper” society should behave. Their blind fanaticism is a far greater threat to the world than people eating steak.


The left are nothing but controlling little tyrants.


Oh No! I hope Canada’s prime minister does not hear about this! Our Liberal government taxes us on our taxes! It won’t be long till Canada gets on board with this they wait for good ideas to tax us with! The elites won’t be happy till they squeeze every last penny out of your pocket.
We are nothing more than their slaves! Climate change is a crock of crap! Tired of the elites spoon feeding us their lies! If people would spend one hour of research on their stupid issues they would see the truth. Tax food! Everyone needs to pt down their phones and Push them Back Hard!


The insanity of George III has been inherited by this menagerie of nincompoops.


I have a better idea! We The People could ALL just rise up and remove those trying to force this BULLSHIITE GW HOAX on society thus lowering the Carbon Footprint altogether!!!!

James King

They can take every cent after we feed ourselves and throw it at climate change and it might make small change around the edges, but it will not stop (let alone reverse) it. What the svientists will not tell you is that the only solution is de-population. Now which of you flaming liberals are ready to jump on that wagon?


Population control will come in the form of pandemic. It will be swift and fair. Nature will restore homeostasis.


I do not know anything about this “group of researchers in Oxford University, England”. Are these educated men and women? Without using curse words, I do believe this is the stupidest idea I have seen in print.


ClimateOtter ” NO”
“I agree that what their talking about is the “NO” cycle (Nitrogen Cycle)
Like the Earth’s water, nitrogen compounds cycle through the air, aquatic systems, and soil. But unlike water, these compounds are being injected into the environment in ever increasing quantities. In doing so, we are altering the global nitrogen cycle, causing possible grave impacts on biodiversity, global warming, water quality, human health, and even the rate of population growth in developing nations.”
“Although carbon dioxide may get more press, “the nitrogen cycle has been altered more than any other basic element cycle,” says John Aber, vice president for research and public service at the University of New Hampshire.”


These people are nuts! No tax on food.

El Thomaso

Globalism is Marxism on a grand scale.


Every time I buy something made in Canada, I’m being a Marxist?


What a crock of horsedung. These globalists just want our freedom and our money.


ARE THESE PEOPLE TOTALLY INSANE??????????? i think i just answered my own question


“health-promoting climate policy in high-income countries”
It seems they want to turn the population into a bunch of vegetarians.
What a crock, we are evolved to eat meat – we are not rabbits!


I think it was the author Piers Anthony who once said something along the lines of “My ancestors did not spend 3 million years climbing up the food chain so that I could eat rabbit food.”

NEVER! I see how greedy these people are they are drooling over taxing people – absolute lies.


Taxing food . . . . right, where do we start?
Bread (fermenting yeast = pockets of man-made CO2 to meet human need on a global scale).
All other yeast-based bakery products incl. Bhabas, Croissants, Fruit Loaves, Doughnuts (CO2).
Cleaning down of Industrial Scale Bakery Eqipment with dry ice pellets (= CO2).
Sodium Bicarbonate (Baking Powder) used in the global snack food industry (= CO2).
Sodium Bicarbonate used in the cake, cookie and biscuit industry (what are those tiny bubbles?).
MAP (modified air packaging) O2 is replaced with CO2 to prevent oxidisation in meat, fish & veg.
Industrial scale man-made CO2 enriched greenhouses – to optimise fruit & veg growth.
Liver salts (lots of big fizzy CO2 bubbles) if you’ve over indulged on the wrong food.
Denture cleaning products (more fizz to ‘lift’ the food from your false teeth).
I could go on all night . . . . just don’t get me started on the “Beverage Industry”.
And still, only about 4% of all CO2 is man-made. 96% of the stuff is entirely natural.
Get over it you highly opinionated, self-righteous do-gooders. Leave us alone. CAGW is a lie.

Chris Pearson

One cannot help but wonder….are these people actually paid to think up this shit?


Yes, by other people who hope to get rich implementing this shit.

daddy warbucks

As the NWO gets bigger, because they produce nothing, provide no revenues, they need to create more ways to tax you, it has nothing to do with ‘global warming’.
YOO HOO! Imagine the savings if the USA stopped funding the UN and reduced our federal monster government back to it’s Constitutional mandate (before it self creates it’s own full blown tyrannical plan)
Too many layers and layers of non-producing federal government and UN parasites in suits needing evermore revenues for their opulent salaries, lifestyles and ever growing pensions (and who are getting more and more authoritarian and predatory toward it’s citizens.
How about staring here; all states reject ‘federal’ funding, demanding reconstitution of states rights, taking back federal confiscation of state’s property and kick the UN the hell out of our country:
One dollar spent on a ‘FEDERAL’ level cost 10 times more than if that same job was done on a ‘STATE’ level, logic would point to keeping federal government no bigger than our constitutional mandate, notice the federal government taking states property and states rights away from states and handing control of US properties and law making over to the UN?
Now add in the cost of the UN and the obscene waste and inefficiency of ‘world’ dollars:
Wikipedia the UN and see how BEHEMOTHIC it now is with all it’s agencies, impotent peace keeping forces, organizations, commissions and each comes with their own building complexes, vehicles, uniforms, equipment, support complexes, staff, salaries, travel, security, food and energy expenses, conferences AND the now hundreds of thousands of UN retirees (mostly foreign) and their pensions, perks and benefits.
YOO HOO, who do you think is paying for all of that?
And most UN employees don’t even pay any tax (some ‘internal’ tax …whooppee).
… So, how many UN ‘world’ (foreign) pensioners are we funding with our taxes?
Imagine how much extra money we would have if we defunded the world’s behemothic tax parasites and redundant layers of government that are becoming more and more tax hungry and authoritarian towards it’s citizens.
The UN and all of it’s huge organizations, commissions and agencies including the IMF and World Bank, generate no revenues, are not subject to the laws of any country it operates in, pays no tax, produce nothing, is dictating ‘world’ regulations, confiscating your wealth through federal taxation and backdoor taxation through complicit federal government agencies like the EPA.
YOO HOO! Imagine the savings if our country stopped funding the UN.
Lagarde’s (IMF) salary is over $300,000 + per year PLUS tens of thousands in ‘stipends’. and she PAYS NO TAX.
“most UN employees pay no tax”.
The IMF and World Bank are UN agencies of now countless agencies, commissions and organizations, one big Trojan Horse and tool of a few dynastic families, sucking the wealth, sovereignty, freedoms and life out of the world.
The IMF is nothing more than a world asset stripping debt collector for the western alliance globalist elites.
Global taxation, a ‘one world’ currency and open borders are all part of the globalists plan to eliminate sovereignty of nations.
10 nations that control the world’s gold – MarketWatch
Oct 20, 2012 … The International Monetary Fund is the third-largest official holder of gold, with more than 2,814 tonnes.
Where’s all that IMF gold coming from? (Ask NATO?< Libya? Egypt? Tunisia? Ukraine? soon Syria?) And Germany can't get their's back?
The IMF is ANOTHER UN agency, it is not a 'nation', it has been deemed 'supranational sovereignty' (deemed by the UN's 'International Court of Justice' -yep, another UN agency). so the UN creates an agency to deem itself and it's other agencies supranational sovereignty over the world and makes it's own laws, decides it needn't pay any tax nor provide any revenues -sweet deal if your a UN employee.
"A monarchy is that which calls itself a monarchy" (only if the people allow it).
UN? Proven corrupt, unelected, made up mostly of 3rd world dictatorships.
NATO, the UN and all of it's agencies, commissions, organizations, etc  (UN agencies include the IMF and World Bank), all have the same boss, they're all really just tentacles of the giant, globalist vampire banksters squid.
Notice the elimination of individual accountability? 'NATO' decided this or that, the 'UN' deemed this or that, and we must all comply regardless of our rights, freedoms and laws of OUR OWN COUNTRY. Any official that your taxes fund needs to be thrown out if they support the UN. The working tax payer needs to be mobilized against funding the UN.
We have to stop giving credibility and decision making powers to unelected foreign entities that we are forced taxed to fund while they supplant our own country’s laws and sovereignty and take control over our resources.
Time for individual states to reject 'federal money', take 'federal land' ownership and control back to the individual states it BELONGS TOO, re-instate all states rights, Pull out of NATO, defund and take away the UN’s ‘supranational sovereignty’, restitution of it's assets (starting with the IMF's (stolen?) gold hoard) claw back foreign pensions (US taxes for foreigners) and kick them the hell out of our country.
Know Your Enemy Part 63 – The United Nations Background – By The Fuel Project
Know Your Enemy Part 64 – The Spiritual United Nations
Know Your Enemy Part 65 – The World Core Curriculum
Know Your Enemy Part 66 – Alice A Bailey
Know Your Enemy Part 67 – The War on Parents

Warren Latham

There is no such thing as a third world.

Old Sailor

Let them lead the way. Give up anything like beef, oil, etc.


Vegan’ pass much more noxious flatuence from both ends…Vegan should have to pay vegan-tax…

tobin hess

ha ha ha ha ha, what a fucking joke this is

Alix Smith

Anything to put more money in their pockets. That’s what climate change is all about!

Alix Smith

Some of the other quotes I’ve read from these fascist leftists are:
* Even though it’s not true it’s the right thing to do. (A former Canadian EPA scientist).
* Even though it’s not completely true it’s the right thing to do for “Social Justice!”
* People will be forced to have abortions, and those wanting to have children will have to ask to be chosen by lottery.
* We should have never eradicated Smallpox
* If the terrorists were good people they would spread the ebola virus throughout the world to keep the population down.
* Some agree on a population of 500 million, and other think upward to one billion. (They never do say how they plan to get rid of at least 7+ billion people)!
* If we decide that man can still live on Earth I suggest it be Scientists and Musicians.
This is a very small number of the quotes I had on my last computer. I wish I had saved it on a thumb drive.

Alix Smith

We can keep the rivers, stream, oceans, etc. clean. We can try to limit smog, etc. But the climate has been changing for billions of years and it’s called Summer, Autumn, Winter, and Spring. You can’t tame Mother Nature! Think New Zealand?

E. Gallo

This is the globalist mindset. More like Hunger Games than ending world hunger. The claimed concern about saving lives is a red herring. Most likely these guys in private are for “culling the herd” of excess humans (meaning humans who are not part of the ruling clique).

El Tigre

These twits don’t realize that plants need CO2 to grow like we need oxygen. CO2 in the air is like fertilizer for plants.


NO, and time to put Trump on these hacks and stop this insanity.

Keith G

“I can see the day when even your home garden will be against the law”
……Bob Dylan

This is what happens when a government or governments are ‘broke and run out of other people’s money’. The Central Banks are bankrupt, and all global governments can only print money. History reveals insane taxation of the victims of government corruption is always the ‘last straw’ pulled before total collapse.

George Markos

These people are insane.


Not insane, evil.


Libtards always want to tax. Anything and everything. Fascist clueless a-holes. As if Brexit and Trump never happened. These folks are called “intellectuals”?!?! Freakin’ morons. Criminal.


This will be cited by the hoaxers as “one of the many actions accomplished to fight the effects of ‘global climate change.'”
Just don’t ask for any details quantifying their effect, however…!!

John denny

Is everyone in the UK bat shite crazy?


No, just the ones who want to run the country. (Mostly for their own benefit)

“This proposal, from a group of people who have probably never missed a meal in their lives, is totally obscene. High income countries often have a lot of poor people who would be hard hit by increases in the price of food.”
These people have needlessly driven up the cost of energy. Now they want to drive up the cost of food. Actually, they already have, through mandatory biofuel mandates and huge subsidies.
All they are doing is increasing human suffering, especially among the elderly and the poor.
These are criminal acts, true crimes against humanity. These people belong in jail.
Regards, Allan


You’re exactly right, Allen. Those people are nothing more than a nest of vipers who are in it for themselves. They care nothing for anyone who cannot do anything for them. They follow Lucifer, not Jesus Christ.


Perfect answer.


This is part of the globalists plans to depopulate the world by five to six billion people, war, famine, disease….these sick people need to go. Put them all on an island and let them fight for their own food.

john doe

Some asshole has stated that food could be used as a weapon,And here it is.We are so screwed,isis on one side the un on the other .they both want to control the world in their warped image and we get to pay for it. They are the same in the end we are controlled by assholes.

So, the folks who bitch (at us) about world hunger, want to make food drastically more expensive.
And if forced to acknowledge that their acts will cause MORE people to starve, they will casually disregard those very real dead and harmed people; because THEY are addressing what MIGHT happen in FOUR TO FIVE GENERATIONS.
On this topic, I hope Trump proves to live completely up to expectations.

K. Chris C.

Very insightful noticing that those that lament world hunger are also pushing for world starvation.
As for Trump, you’re going to be very disappointed, as were those that laid up their hopes in Roosevelt, Truman, Ike, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama. Look for 9/11 2.0, this time blamed on Iran. And that wall?! It’s a canard to keep Americans in, not “illegals” out.
The simplest thing that can be said about “climate change” and proposed “solutions” is: Government first. When they cease their war, waste and corruption, all very heavy “carbon emitters,” then they can ask that we follow suit. Until then, they can blow it out their venal asses.
An American citizen, not US subject.

Yes that’s the solution to any real or imaginary problem. Tax the hell out of us.

This is just a UN mandate to control human movement. There is NO scientific evidence, or more importantly, common sense evidence that “Proteins” are causing climate change. These fucktards are control freaks plan and simple. If they don’t crawl back under their rocks it’s going to be whack a mole time at the amusment park folks. Global elites your days are truly numbered.


In the end, we are all dead. Bye.

Ronald Show

These idiots need to be locked up and have the key thrown away. It’s another case of the liberal far left trying to control what we eat. Dear god protein is essential for a healthy body. Especially in children and the malnourished. Pricing meat and dairy so low income families cannot afford it is beyond belief. Whatever university conferred a degree on these idiots should lose their credentials. But stupid is stupid and liberals have never been in short supply of it!

Military Patriot

Eat less meat, drink less milk, eat more candy. Absolutely insane bunch of idiots!

The only thing to be done at this stage is to strip out the bloated leftist maggots from the rotten, crawling cores of all of our institutions of higher learning and rebuild them from the bottom up.


Exactly right. These tyrannical fascists must be dealt with. We can do it the easy way, or we can do it
the hard way.

Alix Smith

I had a list of quotes from these so called “climate experts” on my old computer. Their top priority is to do away with a large portion of people living on this planet. One fairly famous person stated that: “If the terrorists were good people they would spread ebola around the world.” These are leftists fascists, and history tells us what they are willing to do to achieve their utopia!

Peter Anastos

One could only wish for such a miracle, but these entrenched leftists will continue to poison our society, ruin our children and oppose ANY and ALL critical thinking. These leftist academics are extremely dangerous and destabilizing. They are a cancer on the planet.

Alix Smith

Yes they are, and of course, they think they are so much smarter than the average person! They take 10 plus Suv’s to get to their gas guzzling jets. Barbra Streisand owns a complex with at least 10 houses on it, and even thoughtes to no one lives in any of them they are heated, lighted, and cooled year round. But of course she’s all for fixing
climate change.


Those houses also have swimming pools. Even if the pool heater isn’t on (it usually is), the pumps have to be kept running and chemicals have to be added to it continually in order to keep the algae at bay.


Brett Brunson

Agree, but it’s a three step plan based on the acuteness of the dysfunction caused:
1. Dismantle the Leftist mainstream media
2. Dismantle the Leftist bureaucracies
3. Dismantle the Leftist educational institutions
All of these function in unison to create dysfunction across the time spectrum, short term, medium term and long term.

Rhoda R

Only #2 is doable by the government. #1 can be accomplished by preventing the snuffing out of the independent internet media by twitter, facebook and google. I’m not sure that eliminating DOE and defunding college education will accomplish the goal. I don’t know how to get the education system back under control of real people.


Start with education. All these idiots are a product of looney left professors and teachers.

These people have gone crazy.
Since Climate Change has been going on for over 4 billion years, what do they think they can do about it.


Climate change is a fact of life. The real threat to the Earth is too many humans, sadly, stupid ones. We need to heed Plato’s advice on breeding.

Jim marshall

Show us idiots the first step in reducing the population by taking yourself out first.


Who gets to decide which humans are fit for breeding?
That’s the route the eugenicists took. It’s not a good one.

John Holladay

For those who really feel mankind is the problem, they should leave and reduce the population & their excess use of earth resources. Until they do they cannot be taken seriously.
Tax food, they are selfish and hypocrites. They fly around causing more pollution than many do in a year, bet their menu causes more pollution than any five of the rest of us.
Take, please, that clown Kerry who went to Antarctica and burned up more CO2 than the whole USA does in a full day. What business dose Kerry have in land that has no nation we need to deal with? And can you imagine what the around the world tour of Obama, the advocate of human caused global warming, has burned up? Get rid of the elite and their trips and we save the planet. The environmentalist should be in an uproar about these two trips, until they are rioting on these trips they cannot be taken serious either.

John Holladay

[snip – stolen name -policy violation -mod]

The environmentalist lefty Elites consider themselves “SPECIAL” and therefore above the laws and rules that should apply to the rest of us commoners. Thank GOD Trump won!

In the habit of criticizing yourself?
So, which version of you might be correct?


John, are you actually claiming that Lurch’s many mansions collectively, produce no more CO2 than does a single, average sized home?
PS: CNS is not the Christian Science Monitor.
PPS: The article said that the CO2 emissions from that one trip was equal to the yearly output of a single American.
PPPS: Are you really as stupid and bigoted as you make yourself sound?


ATheoK: Wouldn’t surprise me if the second John is a troll using a stolen name.


What we want is balance. It is OK to have Marxist professors as long as we have a significant number of Libertarians. What we want is lively debate where ideas have to fight for survival.
What we have is orthodoxy.

But things began changing in the 1990s as the Greatest Generation (which had a fair number of Republicans) retired and were replaced by the Baby Boom generation (which did not). As the graph below shows, in the 15 years between 1995 and 2010 the academy went from leaning left to being almost entirely on the left. Heterodox Academy

The orthodoxies do not get challenged and we get BS piled on a solid foundation of BS. The other problem is that analysis is privileged over knowledge. Our students are taught to fabricate castles in the sky based on almost no actual empirical facts. In fact, the postmodernists have it that facts don’t matter because facts are mere social constructs. link
As for solutions

It may be harder than we thought


unfortunately Bob, you have not let go of your feelings for rational discourse and compromise. Leftists NEVER admit defeat. A loss is just a temporary pause. a compromise is just a half step forward until the chance comes to run all the way. When they lose at the ballot, they go to the court. Should the courts fail to be swayed, they take to the streets.
Marxists have proven by a century of One Hundred Million Bodies, they are a danger to all of humanity.
it was best said by some one else, in the argument over drinking a cup of poison, there is no compromise position that will satisfy the other side.
Anyone preaching Marxism should be held to the same level of disgust and contempt as an advocate of Genocide and Slavery.

unfortunately Bob, you have not let go of your feelings for rational discourse and compromise. Leftists NEVER admit defeat. A loss is just a temporary pause. a compromise is just a half step forward until the chance comes to run all the way. When they lose at the ballot, they go to the court. Should the courts fail to be swayed, they take to the streets.
Marxists have proven by a century of One Hundred Million Bodies, they are a danger to all of humanity.
it was best said by some one else, in the argument over drinking a cup of poison, there is no compromise position that will satisfy your enemy.
Anyone preaching the cryptoreligion of Marxism should be held to the same level of disgust and contempt as an advocate of Genocide and Slavery.

commieBob wrote:
“Our students are taught to fabricate castles in the sky based on almost no actual empirical facts. In fact, the postmodernists have it that facts don’t matter because facts are mere social constructs.”
Allan wrote:
Well said Bob.
One of my friends, and eminent meteorologist, told me about a presentation he attended, given by a warmist academic.
My friend said:
“This guy lives in a virtual world, not the real one. His entire presentation was the output of computer models. He never referred to real world data. His model output was nothing like observed, measured reality He did not seem to realise this, or perhaps he did not think it relevant.”
That is the essence of the global warming scam. It is not real. It is virtual reality, actually virtual falsehood, the product of computer models that used highly inflated estimates of the sensitivity of climate to increasing CO2 – up to ~10 times too high.
The warmist climate models also ignore the observed fact that CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales, from ~9 months in the modern data record to ~800 years in the ice core record, on a longer time cycle. The warmists ignore this fact, because it proves they are saying the future is causing the past.
This lag of CO2 after temperature does not mean that CO2 does not drive temperature. It is probable that CO2 drives temperature AND temperature drives CO2. The lag means that temperature drives CO2 much more than CO2 drives temperature, and that the sensitivity of climate to increasing CO2 is so small as to be insignificant. This lag also does not mean that temperature is the ONLY cause of increasing atmospheric CO2 – other causes, such as land use change, fossil fuel combustion, etc. could also cause rising CO2 concentrations. However, increasing CO2 is beneficial, to humankind AND the environment.
We also know what drives global temperature, and it is not increasing CO2. Global temperature is overwhelmingly driven by ENSO in the short term (decades) and probably by the integral of solar activity in the longer term (large fractions of a century and longer). Major volcanoes such as El Chichon (1982) and Mt. Pinatubo (1991) have a significant temporary cooling effect, typically dissipating over about five years.
In a functioning computer climate model, atmospheric CO2 would play such a small role that it could be eliminated with no significant impact on model accuracy.
Finally, atmospheric CO2 at 400 ppm is not alarming high, it is dangerously low for the survival of terrestrial carbon-based life on Earth. During one of the next Ice Ages, enough atmospheric CO2 will dissolve in the oceans that most terrestrial plants, including almost all our food crops, will shut down, and that will be the end of most or all terrestrial carbon-based life on this beautiful blue-water planet. We can probably prevent this sad end through geo-engineering (albedo control), but first we must get the science right, and now, the consensus as promoted by the warmist IPCC is utterly wrong.
Regards to all my carbon-based friends, Allan 🙂

One of my friends, AN eminent meteorologist…


Feed them to the hogs – then we can eat the hogs.

Drain the Swamp(s)

Spot on!

AMEN! Get rid of all of them!

Les Johnson

I am guessing these researchers have never seen, or been in a food riot. This would be their chance.


Let’s find the alternate reality where Soylent Green actually happened, and shove them into it.

Great idea……..I just watched the movie for the umpteenth time the other night!


I second the motion.


I would venture the citizens of Venezuela among other left wing paradises will take issue with this. Sarah Palin for US Ambassador to UN.


Why do you think those in the UK have already been effectively disarmed?

How about taxiing the movement of the global warming cult’s collective mouth? That will pay for it in a year.


There is no idea so.stupid, expensive, or dowright evil that academics won’t buy into it.

Just some academics, and mainly from the soft sciences and humanities


Even so-called hard scientists fall into this group – just dangle some grant money under their noses that is contingent on “proving” global warming, and they fall into line quickly (and have been ever since Al Gore invented this BS).


I was fired from a position at Sandia Labs because I questioned the cult of global warming.

Just some academics, and mainly from the soft sciences and humanities
Ruminants have lived on earth a very long time and in massive herds; Julius Caesar, entering into ””Gaul” described wild bulls oalmost as large as elephants.

El Tigre

How about the estimated 60,000,000 bison that lived in the US around 1800?


“Some ideas are so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them” -George Orwell

These people are not academics, but propagandists funded by people with agendas, UK unis are being overrun by these supposed “Research” centres, lending their rapidly diminishing names to highly dodgy political propaganda outlets. The “Environmental Change Institute”, also attached like a cancer to Oxford Uni, is another example.

Peter Anastos

No, that is a very bad idea. Firstly, there is no real science to suggest such a thing would matter to the climate, second there is no real science that man is causing the climate to change, since the climate has been changing for millions of years naturally. Thirdly, there is only junk “science” hysteria on this topic. Nothing else matters.

Tom in Florida

It doesn’t matter what the science is or isn’t. Those in charge need more taxes so they can keep people poor and dependent on the handouts they receive from them, deir massas.


The article stated that they were going to tax bad foods, and use the money to subsidize the poor so that they can still afford to buy food. (They don’t mention that 10 to 50% of the money would be siphoned off to support the commissars who are going to run this program.)


Nothing else matters ? Really ? . . . Yeah, really.
by Metallica @

Those on Welfare, Entitlement Programs, etc. believe taxes do not affect them. They are not aware of the hidden taxes embedded in everything purchased. Ex., 1972, bread – 30 percent, 1984 Vehicles – $3k avg.
This past decade if Welfare payments were not tripled they have fallen far behind. Same with the employed if they have not received wages in line with inflation. Because of price increase for necessities such as food, rent, etc the hidden taxes have dramatically increased.
These hidden taxes fall heavist on the poor and those dependent on government subsistance. Can mandate higher minimum wages but then the price of everything goes up and more people are laid off increasing government dependence.
We are constantly told unemployment is very low yet the number of Net Tax Payers continue to decline. As it is the top 3 million tax payers pay 87% of all income taxes. Everybody employed pays Social Security taxes. And, everybody pays hidden taxes.
Not many people understand that a business is just another tax collector for the IRS. They are the source for all hidden taxes. When a business reduces its tax burden they are actually reducing the buyers product cost.
When a business pays taxes on net income it is really a tax on the investors. They then pay an additional tax on their dividend income.
You can thank all the Lawyer Politicians for this state of affairs. The Democrats are most responsible but there was/is no real push back by the Republicans. They are all feed by Taxes, Globalist, and Wall Street.

Tom in Florida

In that light, consider what an increase in minimum wage really is. A massive social security tax increase placed on the backs of businesses, without having to pass an actual tax increase bill. The business will have to absorb the wage increase and add an additional 7.5% for their portion of FICA. Those increased expenditures are not matched by any increase in employee productivity or revenue. In the end, the government gets 7.5% FICA increase and the 7.5% increase from the business. For every $1/hr increase in minimum wage, the government gets $.15/hr. A $40 increase in weekly wage will redirect $6 per week per worker to the government. How many people will this affect? Let’s be conservative and say 20,000,000. That would allow the government to rake in an additional $120,000,000 per week, over $6.2 billion per year. And it all comes right out of the pockets of businesses and done without the stigma of voting for an actual tax increase.


The government only gets that extra money if the person remains employed.
A few years ago I read about a machine that could make something like 100 burgers per hour. It did everything, it ground the meat to order, cut the pickles and tomatoes, shredded the lettuce, cooked the pattie and assembled your burger, right when you order it.
These machines are too expensive for all but premium joints at present, but the cost is coming down. If the minimum wage rises, that just means that these machines will become cost effective for regular burger joints that much sooner.


Good Lord. A new low. Let’s hope, especially with the election results that this nonsense is relegated to the trash heap of history as soon as humanly possible.

Monna Manhas

If such a policy were implemented they might find that there are suddenly a LOT more hunters out there, which would negatively impact wild species, would it not? And poaching would probably increase significantly. Shades of Robin Hood and the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Bruce Gregory

I’m guessing the citizen hunters would be part of a “Most Dangerous Game” rewrite and the politicians would find their place in the story not to their liking.


Well, of course they could have a huge tax on hunting licenses, restrictions on how much game you can take, and steep fines with prison time for those who not follow the rules. Government has taken total control over what we can or cannot do. Any freedom you think you enjooy now is simply one they have not yet taken action on.


They can try, doesn’t mean they will succeed. Under such a scenario they are going to have to increase the salaries paid to rangers by a huge amount, in order to compensate for the dramatic increase in job related risk.

Curious George

I thought Oxford was a good school.


It is for them.

Pop Piasa

It was when John Rutter taught music there.


You are right– it was.


If you’d simply paid your roofs and roadways white . . . you’d change the albedo of the planet. And provide much more cooling than simply ruining your Subject’s lives.

Michael l Jones

No, even this idea may not work if you think it through. Billions of gallons of paint – where would it come from and what would be the “global warming” results of the paint itself?Mining of minerals for ingredients? Manufacturing processes? VOC’s? Transport? Application products? Runoff as it is applied or wears off?


Ever notice that the areas of the Earth with the highest albedo all have one thing in common? They’re all deserts.


Sorry chief, low albedo equates to higher local temperatures — aka urban heat island effect due to lower albedo than surrounding suburban and rural areas. Paint your roads and rooftops white..


Not all deserts are hot.


That is one of the most interesting ideas I’ve heard in a while! I think you might be onto something.


I stated a few years back that if all cars and all roofs were white, and everyone who drove a car would use some kind of windshield screen while parked. Global warming would pretty much go away.
First more light reflected rather than absorbed. A secondary affect would be less AC being used, which would also help to cool urban areas.

If that is such a cheap, effective, measure why do we not see “climate warriors” proposing it? Is climate change is an excuse for another agenda?


Why? Not enough opportunity for graft and corruption.

” Is climate change is an excuse for another agenda?”
What was your first clue?

Pop Piasa

White roof membrane lasts considerably longer than the original black did at the university facility I managed. Some of it is because our original flat roofs were ballasted with rock and perforations were more frequent. the smooth, brown Meramec river gravel absorbed heat, held moisture and made it hard to walk while servicing rooftop HVACs. The flip side was that on winter days or cool fall evenings it was quite comfortable as long as the wind was calm.

I was told about this nearly a year ago. Just paint sky-facing things white. A far better solution to global warming than solar panels.
Left / enviros are not interested in white. They want renewable energy.
Left / enviros are not non-CO2 nuclear power. They want renewable energy.
This is turning into a bit of a pattern. I almost suspect they don’t believe in CAGW, despite their protestations!

Oops: “Left / enviros hate non-CO2 nuclear power. They want renewable energy.”

… and rising sea levels can be fixed if everybody fills a bottle with sea water and keeps it under the bed?


I have long suspected that most of the AGW pushers don’t really believe in it, or at least are aware of the shaky nature of the science they claim is clear-cut and unambiguous. There could be a thousand reasons why they push AGW anyway… desire for control, the wish to fit in and be liked, not wanting to appear stupid to all the others who are standing with them admiring the emperor’s new clothes. They spend so much time making “deniers” into the stupid ones that they have to feel conflicted and guilty if they let their own doubts make it to the surface. Their zealotry, thus, may be as much an effort to convince themselves as it is to convince us.

Lefties go in for virtue signalling bigtime. Perhaps this is why there aren’t so many lefty sceptics? Anyone who doesn’t signal virtue may find they’re subject to emotional, moral and career blackmail to toe the AGW line. Especially in academia. It’s easier to lie back and think of Socialism, than resist the “climate hawks”.


Just don’t pee in the ocean while filling your bottle.


It’s now called climate change because global cooling nor global warming panned out.

The Pro AGW game is over chumps….best to deal with the grief of the loss of your faux religion and get on with your lives.

The malign interaction of the green blob and veganisism in action. Dietary studies are almost as political as climate science, and almost as badly done in practice.

Warren Latham

Too right E. W. : obscene, to the power of umpteen.
Morons to the left of us …

Let’s have some form of governmental control of every facet of or activity in life, then life will really be good. Those folks are far more intelligent than I am and so, I surrender to their superiority. (If necessary, sarcasm.)

The Age of Gross

If anyone was serious about climate change they would espose population control. Stop supporting bastard children. Stop immigration. Stop foriegn aid.


Why is it these groups never say “You’re hurting the environment, stop it”, moving to ban the activity. Instead it’s always “You’re hurting the environment, pay me”. Almost enough to make you think the money is the point …

Robert Teed

Funny how Zerka was out of control but today World Health Organization declared emergency over. Wonder how much government money is left for them to waste??? It’s all about the money!

Informed Consumer

I love animals.
They are tasty. Yum!

Steve C

The animals making this disgraceful suggestion used to be known as “Long Pig” …


I think im going to get a few more goats, and a couple young cattle, perhaps my own mini breeding heard of Angus cattle…. tax that

chris moffatt

How do they think this absurb suggestion, if implemented, would not ‘impact negatively on low income populations’? Methinks it’s getting time to reconsider Oxford University’s reputation as the home of the elite intelligentsia.

It isn’t – it’s a hopelessly corrupted mess – like the journals and the MSM.


Not too big a step from this to taxing human life, if you breathe you must pay per exhalation. They truly want to rule every aspect of our lives…

Pop Piasa

It is already construable as a tax on staying alive and healthy, therefore a tax on a basic part of life.

Don’t give them any ideas 🙂

Roy Jones

I can see the logic. If you raise food prices and millions of people starve to death they are not going to be exhaling CO2.
I have never understood why so many of the Alarmists are also Malthusians; unless it’s just another way of hating humanity and saving Gaia.

Because obsessing over limits is a natural mindset (as well as naturalistic). An easy trap for pessimists to fall in to. Obsessing over limits leads to the conclusion: there is not enough to go around. “We are using resources up at the rate of two earths.“, as they say. Enviros were more obsessed by resource limits too in the past. They portray CO₂ as another limit. Too much this time.
A more cynical viewpoint is: they arranged their anti-nuclear and anti-CO₂ campaigns as anti-energy campaigns. Some of them were explicit in this. Especially some Californians from the late 1960s. They thought the only way to save nature was to limit human migration into California. Hence the stupid policies we’ve seen in California since then: preventing large scale energy systems (not just nuclear power but also hydro). Preventing any major water management.
Many anti-nuke activists were (probably still are) engaged in constipating nuclear power, as they called campaigning against used fuel (AKA: spent nuclear fuel). No one was ever been harmed by spent nuclear fuel. The anti-CO₂ campaign is similar. As Tim Ball puts it:

You can stop a car engine by cutting off the fuel supply, but that would be extremely difficult and elicit quick anger in a country, as anger when fuel prices jump demonstrate. However, you can also stop a car engine by blocking the exhaust. Transfer that idea to nations and show that CO₂, the byproduct of combustion of fossil fuels, was causing runaway, catastrophic, global warming to achieve the goal. What nastier image than the belching car exhaust or the even more dramatic chimneys of industry?

Limits obsession explains: their love of renewable energy, phobia of nuclear power (nuclear waste obsession), CAGW, Malthus.
PS: They are politically correct Malthusians though. They will not discus Malthus positively. They even claim we should open borders. So impractical Malthus with it! Malthus is implicit in modern environmentalism, not explicit like 45 years ago.

Actually, if these morons were serious, they would start with the idea of closing down all the multiplex cinemas across the planet. What a waste of real estate and energy.
How many of us sit in these large theater complexes completely alone, or maybe with a couple of other movie goers? The heating and air conditioning needs of these facilities must be gigantic.
And the fuel consumed to drive to these theaters? There and back………..just to see a movie? Wow, I can wait for the DVD and enjoy the movie at home in the comfort of my recliner.
Oh well, if these morons succeed, I can always sprinkle some A-1 sauce on my DVDs and see if they are as good as a Porterhouse steak.


“save half a million lives”
while killing several millions from malnutrition and impaired health for 100s of millions. Yeah, that ‘s a great idea. I cannot wait for the US to reverse the EPA’s CO2 endangerment finding and the CO2 is bad meme starts to crumble. What is interesting is that they want to decrease the demand for meat but also want to increase the numbers of wild animals that will essentially make this move a wash in terms of CO2 emitted by grazing animals.

See, the government is always trying to help us, heh heh heh.

William Walters

When you educate assholes, you wind up with educated assholes. Hence ideas like this

Steve C

“This proposal, from a group of people who have probably never missed a meal in their lives, is totally obscene.” Eric, you took the words straight out of my mouth.

When the Climate Fanatics start promoting taxing FOOD in support of an unproven theory it may be time to seriously consider another inquisition.
These people are not only dangerous, they are insane.


Poor people could still eat approved vegan fare devoid of vitamin B12, which is required for brain health.

As we’ve seen here in America, the only thing that stops climate change is to elect conservatives.

Well can’t just be any conservative. The GOPe types like Romney, and Bush and McCain would go along with this scam. Being anti-CO2 is a poison should be a litmus test for anyone seeking office.

Shannon Kane

Enough of this hoax. They also don’t count the already proven fake numbers for climate models.(old data), the booms that have been written to prove this is nothing more than a way to end capitalism. And also that consensus is not science. Not to mention the natural tonnage of Corbin already released by decaying matter. And lastly the co-founder of Greenpeace called it a hoax as well. Enough of this fake crap by big govt’s to control it’s people.
Duplicate comment ~mod

Taxing food? Brilliant!! Of course since the poor will be affected the most they will need to be subsidized from higher taxes somewhere else. Do these people have a brain cell that works? Making it harder to survive in a effort to save the world from the progress that fossil fuels (CO2) have allowed humanity – all the while calling it Climate Change – is the folly of Marxist Progressive thought.


Ask them about water vapor being the most prevalent greenhouse gas. The heat capacity of H2O is many times that of CO2 and at least a hundred times more water vapor in the atmosphere. When do they declare water a pollutant?

Green insanity, raise prices for fuel and food on the poor and the elderly….

Just another money grab by world socialists. Analport do not realize how obvious this is. Can’t get a CO2 tax so you go after food. Maybe that idiot that said the world’s better off if you would stay off maybe he ought to stop eating and shut the heck up

Greg Woods

I’m confused: I thought the idea was to lose lives, not save them…

Schrodinger's Cat

The stupidity of some academics knows no bounds.

Alan Robertson

It’s even more stupid from the Green perspective, because these ‘academics’ exposed the deepest elements of the true Green agenda. The denizens of the climate fearosphere generally try to keep their agenda hidden from “we the people”.

I bet very few of these geniuses would be able to say what the co2 PPM was when earth thrived supporting dinosaurs…or what the mass of the sun is relative to our solar system.
1. The sun’s output changes
2. Hence climate change
How did taxing our tea work out for you?


The looney left just keeps on getting loonier.

Ruminants such as aurochs have existed far longer than civilization

Shannon Kane

Enough of this hoax. They also don’t count the already proven fake numbers for climate models.(old data), the books that have been written to prove this is nothing more than a way to end capitalism. And also that consensus is not science. Not to mention the natural tonnage of Carbon already released by decaying matter. And lastly the co-founder of Greenpeace called it a hoax as well. Enough of this fake crap by big govt’s to control it’s people.Another way to know it’s fake is that they wanted to throw you in jail for denying.


Tax babies –


How about taxing leftism?


Pet rocks, all of them.


They’ve already done that by diverting food products into “clean fuel”.
EPA Sides With Biofuel Industry by Delaying Ethanol Mandate Decision:
Anti-hunger groups argue that the RFS has caused the global price of corn to skyrocket, which has exacerbated hunger in poor countries. It’s also caused prices for poultry, pork, and other livestock to rise as well.

Joseph K.

Insanity Complete insanity. The scam is over folks. It’s all about money… higher taxes, specifically. There will never be enough taxation for the greedy leftists and screaming globalists.


These eggheads just do not get it.
They want to regulate everything through taxation and judicial mandate.
Good thing the world seems to be waking up and taking a stand against these intellectual dimwits.

I’m surprised these children were allowed to leave their homes without adult supervision. Hopefully, mommy packed them a good lunch.


Since they love statism so much, why not propose cradle-to-grave government provided food instead? I mean, that would jump right past all of the interim “nicetites”, wot?
Because it’s not about the food, it’s about the MONEY. Collectivists don’t hate money; they hate that individiuals having it lubricates liberty.

N Maxwell

Sorry climate scammers… There’s a new sheriff in town… the Obama-rama is over…


I say we should have a special tax on pin-head elitist.


Just put a nice tax on the overpriced feel-good organic and European snooty items sold at places like Whole foods.


These pointy-headed academics are living in an echo chamber so heavily insulated from the real world, they don’t even realize how stupid they sound.


You should tax these morons per word for all the hot air and garbage they spew. If they would shut their traps, the temperature would decrease by 2 degrees