Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to The Guardian, The World Economic Forum, a forum composed of large businesses, is concerned that President Trump is withdrawing from global climate agreements which would have triggered the transfer of vast sums of US taxpayer’s cash to large businesses.
US unilateralism makes tacking climate change harder, WEF warns
Donald Trump’s time in office has coincided with huge increase to all five eco risks surveyed
The World Economic Forum delivered a strong warning about Donald Trump’s go-it-alone approach to tackling climate change as it highlighted the growing threat of environmental collapse in its annual assessment of the risks facing the international community.
In the run-up to the US president’s speech to its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, next week, the WEF avoided mentioning Trump by name but said “nation-state unilateralism” would make it harder to tackle global warming and ecological damage.
The WEF’s global risks perception survey showed Trump’s arrival in the White House in 2017 had coincided with a marked increase in concern about the environment among experts polled by the Swiss-based organisation.
It said all five environmental risks covered by the survey – extreme weather events, natural disasters, failure of climate-change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, and human-made natural disasters – had become more prominent.
“This follows a year characterised by high-impact hurricanes, extreme temperatures and the first rise in CO2 emissions for four years. We have been pushing our planet to the brink and the damage is becoming increasingly clear.
“Biodiversity is being lost at mass-extinction rates, agricultural systems are under strain, and pollution of the air and sea has become an increasingly pressing threat to human health.”
…
Here is what the World Economic Forum actually said in its report;
… Humanity has become remarkably adept at understanding how to mitigate conventional risks that can be relatively easily isolated and managed with standard risk- management approaches. But we are much less competent when it comes to dealing with complex risks in the interconnected systems that underpin our world, such as organizations, economies, societies and the environment. There are signs of strain in many of these systems: our accelerating pace of change is testing the absorptive capacities of institutions, communities and individuals. When risk cascades through a complex system, the danger is not of incremental damage but of “runaway collapse” or an abrupt transition to a new, suboptimal status quo.
In our annual Global Risks Perception Survey, environmental risks have grown in prominence in recent years. This trend has continued this year, with all ve risks in the environmental category being ranked higher than average for both likelihood and impact over a 10-year horizon. This follows a year characterized by high-impact hurricanes, extreme temperatures and the first rise in CO2 emissions for four years. We have been pushing our planet to the brink and the damage is becoming increasingly clear. Biodiversity is being lost at mass-extinction rates, agricultural systems are under strain and pollution of the air and sea has become an increasingly pressing threat to human health. A trend towards nation-state unilateralism may make it more difficult to sustain the long-term, multilateral responses that are required to counter global warming and the degradation of the global environment. …
Read more: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2018
Ever since President Trump won the Presidency, greens have assured us that the world can tackle climate change without the help of national governments, that businesses would step into the breach and fix the climate by sacrificing their profits for the greater good – but they keep pointing out their efforts are limited because they don’t have access to US Federal funds.
… Despite the geographical proximity of the “America’s Pledge” delegation, there are limits to what non-state actors can do. They are excluded from many of the technical talks and cannot tap into federal funds that states use to finance commitments to slow climate change or reduce its impacts. More importantly, it is harder for them to set a course for the country.
But while that is missing, Antha Williams, head of the Bloomberg Philanthropies environment team, said it was necessary to fill the void.
“It would be better if we saw leadership from the White House, but the overarching point is that cities, states and companies that represent more than half of the US are showing their support for climate action.” …
In my opinion your President stopped the greatest smash and grab ever attempted, but the risk is still very real. Keep President Trump from harm, because there is a lot more work required to secure the President’s victory over the climate kleptocrats.
What in Sam Hill is “Global Environmental Collapse”?
ANSWER: Mythology
“Mythology”??? That is being charitable.
How can this matter, the US is but one ONLY that pulled out – so there’s enough of a quorum to carry on this task to avert global environment collapse
Sure , there is now a “quorum” of the EU as the donor and all the other major players who are going to be receiving money and have the right to carry on polluting and expanding.
That’ll do it !
“Global Environmental Collapse”? Isn’t that what happens when government spends more on some environment fantasy than it receives in income?
If we’re lucky, the article simply forgot the “ism” part and it will be the collapse of Global Environmentalism
Religion. 🙂
Thank you David.
I enjoyed that more than Naked Gun 3.
Tears !…..those poor melting snowflakes. 🙂
Is that Harvey Weinstein in the background?
Media melt down over Trump election, hilarious.
Sorry David, but Paul David Watson’s Info Wars video still the best parody of the butt-hurt Clinton losers.
https://youtu.be/grD_IINiH9c
Each and every one is crying because each was so looking forward to living a righteous life lecturing other people while spending other people’s money!
Love this pic. Just love it! Kinda looks like the New Orlean Saint’s fans this past weekend. SKOL!
These people are feeling pain, but as Sakini said in Teahouse of the August Moon: “Pain makes you think. Thought makes you wise. Wisdom makes life endurable. Socks up, Boss.” And Bill Clinton: “I feel your pain.” Better him and them, and not me.
How does someone get that misguided?
Oh, that refreshed my very soul!
” environmental collapse”!!!!……………..ROTFL
How can you be rolling on the floor laughing? ….. The sky is falling !!!!!!
Because “on the floor” is where the sky has fallen–obviously.
Now, do you see any fragments of shard-sharp sky that might impale our legs and feet?
Do you see any piles of useless cloud stuffing not transporting moisture like Nature intended?
Do you find any layers of condensed CO2 being sequestered out of photosynthetic reconstruction?
Me neither!
All hail pseudo environmental collapse!
Well, today I did have to shovel a pile of white cloud stuffing off my walk and driveway that fell from the sky. And there were some sharp fragments of shard-sharp sky that could cause injury to my legs and feet. 😉
If we don’t do $omething to $top the runaway train of climate change, our children may not know what climate is.
It’s what happens to a leftists when the funding spigot is turned off.
This is a acute condition resulting from removal of Obama Sucker Funds from the Environmental Cause. Our President decided to emulate Hoover and sucked them back home.
Free money runs out causing collapse of the environmental movement, ergo “Global Environmental Collapse”!
I thought it meant total “Collapse of Environmental Organizations” – maybe it does 🙂
Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com
World Economic Forum is least bothered on pollution [air, water, soil & food] that effect all forms of life on the earth as controlling this will severly effect the multinationals income. So, they are worried about CO2 a non-pollution.
Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy
makes sense.
Coping with real issues cost money. coping with non-issues (like CO2) is business opportunity.
That’s that thing that Barney Frank and Bill Clinton set off by deciding that everyone in America should own a home.
somehow it didn’t make the finalists
https://gop.com/the-highly-anticipated-2017-fake-news-awards/
“In our annual Global Risks Perception Survey, environmental risks have grown in prominence in recent years.”
Could that be because they select the recipients of their survey?
Surveys of the public show increasing apathy over climate change.
I said it elsewhere: you want to motivate change? … Just put prohibitive taxes on things you don’t want them doing, or that you want them to curb, and give the money collected to the people who are actually doing the right thing to undo or reverse the damage caused by the things you want to see stop.
It works every time.
In this case, taking the popsicles away from the moneycucks, the big businesses who are slavering at the prospect of getting a gazillion bucks from somewhere. For useless paint-a-pretty-picture-in-crayon efforts.
GoatGuy
I like President Trumps Paris withdrawal bigly. It’s yuge! Maybe the environmentalists can gain refuge status?
Some of the climateer rent-seekers are already relocating to France. Good riddance.
Those “environmentalists” were so embarrassingly ineffective they should still be able to gather annually in remote, CO2-intensive locations and worship their anthropogenic idols.
Oh diddums, The rest of the world misses out on US funds.
US funds go to making America great again to the benefit of all the world.. 🙂
Extra CO2 will ENHANCE environmental outcomes,
…. and the US withdrawal of funs will stop third world dictators from getting quite a rich.
Businesses will only step into the breach if they can see “something in it for them”
With US money off the table….. Not going to happen.
———–
“to a new, suboptimal status quo.”
The AGW Agenda , written and spoken out loud.
The World Economic Forum delivered a strong warning about Donald Trump’s go-it-alone approach to tackling climate change as it highlighted the growing threat of environmental collapse in its annual assessment of the risks facing the international community. — article
‘Strong warning’? Is that like a ‘sternly worded response’?
Seems to me that the only ‘risks facing the international community’ are those that appear when there’s a shortage of money in the ransom piggy bank, and The They expect someone else to pay their way.
I’d rather see my tax money go for rebuilding bridges and highways and dams, and providing jobs to people here in this country.
They should send out a tweet with #hashtag: #waahhhh
I sure Trump would lose sleep over that.
“The World Economic Forum delivered a strong warning about Donald Trump’s go-it-alone approach to tackling climate change”
They better watch out, or Trump may give them a nickname.
Calling people names is infantile behavior. I’m glad you approve of such behavior from Trump.
It is also called branding Tom. Works great for advertisers, and for Trump.
Tom B: While I generally agree with your philosophy and assessment, in the case of dealing with illogical, angry, unthinking persons, there is no polite way to deal. Politeness just encourages them. They do not understand anything other than pushback. I wish it were not so, but it is.
Calling people’s behavior infantile behavior is calling names, which according to you is infantile behavior, Tom.
Got a mirror?
Politicians in general are thugs or virtue signalling ignorant hypocrites. Trump is a refreshing change and I hope he continues to insult these bloodsuckers.
Seems like Tom is mostly “snowflake”..
poor petal !!
(Bjerklund)…
No matter, how you pretend to phrase it; you are guilty of the behavior you describe. Infantile behavior.
Never mind, that the wildly vicious shrieking anti-Trumpers fling baseless claims, absurd lies, ridiculous behaviors, anti-Constitution actions, anti-Democracy freedoms, etc. etc.; nearly constantly, hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, ad nauseum…
Despicable excuses for humans, every one,
All of a sudden, a pretender to the ‘high ground’ flings yet another baseless name.
In reality, most of the names Trump uses, are proper adjectives and adverbs describing those people quite accurately.
If the shoe fits, and especially when everyone knows the shoe fits; wear it.
Geneva Environment Network (GEN), Geneva, Switzerland
World Economic Forum (WEF), Est. 1970
Non-governmental and business organization.
Description and Activities information:
http://www.genevaenvironmentnetwork.org/?q=en/green_guide/world-economic-forum
Geneve internationale, Geneva, Switzerland
Key players in the Geneva region in the fields of Environment & Sustainable Development
Include:
CIEL
ICTSD
IISD
IPCC
UNEP
WMO
WWF International
And others
http://www.geneve-int.ch/environment-sustainable-development
Apple announced in a press release on Wednesday that the company will be investing $350 billion into the U.S. economy over the next five years.
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/01/17/apple-announces-350-billion-investment-into-us-economy-20000-new-jobs/
The money Apple is investing is money they have been storing off-shore because of the high tax rates in the U.S., but now that Trump has lowered taxes Apple is bringing $350 billion back to the U.S. to invest, and they will be paying about $38 billion in taxes to the U.S. government in the process.
That extra $38 billion ought to be enough to pay for Trump’s wall. 🙂
Actually, Trump says he is going to pay for the wall by reducing the trade deficit with Mexico which is currently about $80 billion per year. Eliminating the trade deficit or even reducing it substantially will be more than enough to pay for the wall.
There will be more companies bringing their money back to the U.S. now that the tax rates have been lowered. There is an estimated $3 to $4 billion overseas eligible for this tax reduction.
The U.S. stock market topped 26,000 today which means that the value of the stock market has increased by about $8 TRILLION since Trump was elected!
And this is just the beginning.
I wouldn’t spend the 38 billion on the wall. Trump said he’d make Mexico pay for it.
That should have been $3 to $4 TRILLION that is stuck overseas.
“I wouldn’t spend the 38 billion on the wall. Trump said he’d make Mexico pay for it.”
I guess you didn’t read my entire post. Trump says he will reduce the trade deficit with Mexico and that will pay for the wall.
” There is an estimated $3 to $4 billion overseas eligible for this tax reduction.”
…
Poor TA is mathematically challenged. Off by an order of magnitude.
“The U.S. stock market topped 26,000 today ”
…
Too bad TA thinks this is significant. Paper profits are not real. When all the investors decide to cash in, the market will tank.
Trump has no control over the trade deficit.
…
For example, all the jobs at Carrier that he “saved?”……they shipped them out to Mexico. He’s a failure.
PS Mister Ignorant of Economics…. if the trade deficit is reduced, it adds not a penny to the US Treasury. The “savings” benefit private corporations. So, how are these “savings” going to be appropriated for building the wall?
Tom, you should change your screen name to Triggered Tom.
note to Tom Bjorklund:
Fiat Chrysler just announced they will be spending $1Billion to furnish a plant in Michigan, to bring production of the Ram truck from Mexico, to the US.
Apple just announced a $2500 bonus to its employees. Every bit of that money moving around in the economy will increase the tax revenues to the US treasury.
Just as you said, someone doesn’t understand basic economics and he looks just like you.
Tom, if the international trade deficit is lower that means more money stays in the U.S., supporting more economic activity, MORE taxes and MORE money to build walls or whatever.
Get it?
Neither the Fiat decision, nor the Apple decison will have any effect on the US-Mexico deficit. So, please explain to me how these two items reduces the deficit and makes Mexico “pay” for the building of the wall.
Extreme Hiatus, more money “staying” in the US doesn’t “pay” for the wall. More taxes doesn’t “pay” for it either because no money has been appropriated to build it. If tax dollars are spent on it, then Mexico hasn’t paid for the wall right?
“PS Mister Ignorant of Economics…. if the trade deficit is reduced, it adds not a penny to the US Treasury. The “savings” benefit private corporations. So, how are these “savings” going to be appropriated for building the wall?”
You lefties just can’t refrain from personal attacks, when you don’t have an argument, can you. It’s kind of pathetic.
*Somebody* is ignorant of Economics. When corporations in the U.S. make more money, they pay more money in taxes to the U.S. Treasury.
TA says: ” they pay more money in taxes to the U.S. Treasury.”
…
Good.
…
Now, please tell me how Mexico pays for the wall. I don’t think Mexico pays taxes to the U.S. Treasury, so how are they going to pay for the wall?
PS Mister TA, all the “extra” taxes you think are going to go into the U.S. Treasury?
…
Not going to happen.
…
Why?
..
Corporate taxes just got reduced by the new tax law Trump signed.
Tom. I think you are trying so hard it has put your thinking in a little time-out box. You wrote:
“Extreme Hiatus, more money “staying” in the US doesn’t “pay” for the wall. More taxes doesn’t “pay” for it either because no money has been appropriated to build it. If tax dollars are spent on it, then Mexico hasn’t paid for the wall right?”
To summarize, yada, yada, yada “because no money has been appropriated to build it.”
Yet.
“If tax dollars are spent on it, then Mexico hasn’t paid for the wall right?””
Yet.
“*Somebody* is ignorant of Economics. When corporations in the U.S. make more money, they pay more money in taxes to the U.S. Treasury.”
Just a slight quibble here…NO, their consumers (e.g., you and I) pay their taxes to the Treasure for them.
Since I am among the poor of the great states, please support reducing or eliminating this regressive tax upon me and the ilks of me! Thanks!
“Corporate taxes just got reduced by the new tax law Trump signed.”
And it’s about time! I’m tired of paying the taxes for corporations!!
Tom, you just completely blew your economic credibility with this one:
“Corporate taxes just got reduced by the new tax law Trump signed.”
Are you aware of any cases where the corporate tax rate went down yet the total taxes collected went up?
If not then you need to educate yourself if you want to make informed comments.
sy computing: ” I’m tired of paying the taxes for corporations.”
…
Too bad, you still will continue to pay them in the prices they charge for their products. Keep in mind that the reductions in corporate taxes will only benefit the stockholders and corporate officers of said corporations. The tax savings will be used for stock buybacks, and CEO salaries. If you think for one minute that the tax savings will be used to decrease the price of their products, I have a bridge over the Hudson River you might be interested in purchasing.
…
Enjoy!
“Are you aware of any cases where the corporate tax rate went down yet the total taxes collected went up?”
…
Trickle down economics has never worked.
“The tax savings will be used for stock buybacks, and CEO salaries.”
This can’t be true given your belief system. Since every corp is nothing but a big ‘ole bag o’ greed, it must follow that once a corp has the opportunity to take in more profit, they will. To make more profit, they must sell more product. We know that lower price = more buying from the public, e.g., the poor (like me).
Therefore, if the cost of doing business falls, the first corp to lower prices will expect to have a greater share of the market. By your own belief system they must do this to fulfill their ugly greedy desires…
We, the poor win!
QED
Extreme Hiatus, corporate taxes could go down and total tax revenue could go up, because total tax revenue is comprised of more than just corporate taxes. You seem to forget that total tax revenue incorporates individual income taxes.
“given your belief system”
…
Unfortunately, you don’t have a clue as to what my “belief” system is comporised of.
“You seem to forget that total tax revenue incorporates individual income taxes.”
How could lowering corp taxes increase individual income taxes under your assumptions? That presupposes everyone gets a raise. But we know that can’t be true due to the greed of the corps that provide most of the jobs to the people of the country. You said above, “only the CEO’s” will get raises in such a case?
Don’t you contradict yourself Tom? If not, why not?
TYPO: comprised.
“How could lowering corp taxes increase individual income taxes under your assumptions”
…
I never said individual income taxes increase. That is an invalid assumption on your part.
..
Keep in mind, all these reduction in taxes are being paid for by borrowing money (increasing the deficit.)
“I never said individual income taxes increase. That is an invalid assumption on your part.”
Well Tom what in the world were you saying when you jumped on EH below??? (bold mine)
“Extreme Hiatus, corporate taxes could go down and total tax revenue could go up, because total tax revenue is comprised of more than just corporate taxes.You seem to forget that total tax revenue incorporates individual income taxes.
What in the world are you saying here if not that individual income taxes could go up even with corp taxes going down??? How could this possibly be if the individuals didn’t get a raise???
Nevermind Tom…the question is rhetorical.
All the best!
“The top marginal tax rate on individual income was slashed to 28% from 70%, and the corporate tax rate was reduced to 34% from 48%….
Near the end of Reagan’s second term, tax revenues received by the U.S. government increased to $909 billion in 1988 from $517 billion in 1980. Inflation was reduced to 4%, and the unemployment rate fell below 6%. Although economists and politicians continue to argue over the effects of Reaganomics, it did usher in one of the longest and strongest periods of prosperity in American history. Between 1982 and 2000, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) grew nearly 14-fold, and the economy added 40 million new jobs.”
Read more: Reaganomics https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reaganomics.asp#ixzz54VYATSCP
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
sy computing……maybe a simple example will help you understand reality….
..
Assume total tax revenue from corporations and individuals are 100 units. Furthermore lets say corporations pay 30% of taxes, and individuals pay 70%.
…
So, corporations pay 30 units, and individuals pay 70.
..
A new tax plan is introduced that lowers corporate taxes by 10%.
…
Corporations now pay 27 units instead of 30.
…
However, the economy has grown by 5% so individual taxes have risen from 70 units to 73.5 units.
…
Do the math.
…
Tax revenue is now 27+ 73.5 = 100.5 (not even considering the effect of 5% growth on corporate taxes)
Extreme Hiatus, please tell all of us how many times taxes were INCREASED under Reagan, after the federal deficit ballooned as a result of his initial tax cut.
.
.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/index.htm
I’m guessing, Tom, that you didn’t live through the Reagan Boom.
Or if you did, you deferred to the Democrat’s distorted account of that time period.
Doesn’t matter what you believe or what you assert, you’ll be wrong.
Why?
The economy is taking off, people are glad to be rid of the past 8 years, and criminals from that era will be swinging from the yardarms, starting with Uranium One!
Bon Voyage!
Tom, you wrote:
“Extreme Hiatus, please tell all of us how many times taxes were INCREASED under Reagan, after the federal deficit ballooned as a result of his initial tax cut.”
Why don’t you explain that. Thanks. In the meantime, why don’t you compare what happened to the economy as Obama doubled (at least) the national debt in just 8 years.
Where did all that money go?
If you like your deficit you can keep your deficit.
“Mister Ignorant of Economics”
Yes, calling people names really is JUVENILE, isn’t it Tom.
Paper profits are still profits and generate taxable income.
The stock market is going up because first, companies are making more money so investors expect more dividends, and because people have confidence in the future again.
If the trade deficit is reduced, that means American companies are selling more, which once again means more taxable income.
Gee Tom, if you could get past your hatred of all things Trump, perhaps you would allow yourself to learn something about how the world actually works.
Tom, did you take lessons in how to be clueless, or was it a natural talent?
At present trucks are being built in Mexico and shipped all over the world, including to the US.
In the future those trucks are going to be built in the US.
If you can’t see how that lowers the US deficit with Mexico, than it must be because you are trying hard not to see it.
I see that is stuck in leftwing propaganda line.
1) Reagan’s tax cuts resulted in an increase in tax revenue to the government. The deficit went up because the Democrats increased spending by more than the tax increases went up.
2) Reagan agreed to tax increases in exchange for spending cuts. We got the tax increases but spending always went up.
Al Gore is on their Board of Trustees. And some of the other usual suspects.
https://www.weforum.org/about/leadership-and-governance
Yuck, missed that.
The swamp is wide and deep.
What the heck is the World Economic Forum? It seems to me that is more like a world government legislative session funded by some of the richest oligarchs on the planet. It certainly has nothing to do with democracy.
“What the heck is the World Economic Forum?”
It’s a real fancy china shop that Trump the Bull, is going to be entering shortly.
That’s funny, TA. Not as funny as triggering Bjorklund, but close.
I think Trump is the one that triggered him. He has that effect on a certain segment of society.
Amazing how an actuelle leader can change things! You can always tell if it’s good or bad from the whiners.
It would be very useful to document exactly how that was supposed to happen. If we could prove that some large corporations would benefit by pushing government policy on global warming, that would give us a huge weapon.
The left hates huge corporations. If we could prove that large corporations were behind CAGW alarmism, that would make their heads explode.
“The left hates huge corporations.”
The followers may think they do – they need real or imaginary enemies to unite – but the leaders who manipulate them love big corporations, particularly big multinational ones. And many if not most big corporations love the left. Control freaks are control freaks, power is power, money is money, and that’s what the whole CAGW globalist project is ultimately about.
Yes Virginia, the Global Environmental Movement based around the fake alarmism of Climate Change is on the verge of collapse.
For the hustle to successfully continue, all the Big State actors must play along with the hustle. If one pulls out, as Trump did for the US, the competitive disadvantage of the others becomes more extreme with each passing year. So yes, Climate Change is on the verge of Global Collapse.
But I suspect because there are literally Trillions of dollars to redistribute and skim for the climateers, the Climate Change hustle will have more lives than a dead cat.
“America’s Pledge Phase One Report”
Includes supporters.
Read at:
https://www.bbhub.io/dotorg/sites/28/2017/11/AmericasPledgePhaseOneReportWeb.pdf
The climate hustle is mostly about the UN getting climate aid money to re-distribute while various NGOs get to skim a piece of the action. There is nothing local or state govts can do to enable sending a US contribution to that fund. Without the US sending a hoard of cash to it, the other countries in the EU will ultimately balk too. The UN climate hustle will collapse.
It is collapsing for the same reason that the Clinton Global Initiative collapsed–when contributors found they not only wouldn’t get any “pay” for their “play” but that the IRS would be assessing fines and penalties (and criminal referrals) for illegal participation, it was no longer considered a hot investment!
They started to run away like children in a spook alley.
That is quite the document. It takes credit for bike paths, recycling networks, and everything else most of us have been doing for decades. Energy is, of course, listed by “capacity” rather than actual output. I may have missed it, but I didn’t see a table of how all these groups/businesses are going to raise the money for the $22B US commitment every year. They claim more than 50% of the GDP so they owe $11B per year. IIRC your ex-Prez slipped the UN $1B before he hit the road on his bicycle. I hope they tax their residents for this, because the cities probably would have republican mayors for the first time evah! I don’t care what businesses do with their money; but I won’t be buying any more Mars bars. There are other options. Good luck to them in reaching their “carbon” reduction goals. I’ll stay where I am and just watch all of them fly over.
An American is someone unafraid to put their shoulder to the wheel. Mr.Trump is such a person!
It takes guts and leadership to go against the crowd when it is wrong.
Too bad Trump has neither guts nor has he any leadership abilities.
Tom,
Leaders come in many forms. Trump is not taking the easy road. The easy road would be to further the Deep State interests and agendas of the climate hustle, open borders, and the Islamization of Europe and then the US. Those are directly opposed to the interests of middle-class America and good jobs as Obama did and as Hillary promised she would continue.
I am confident that History will ultimately judge Trump’s announced withdrawal from the Paris Climate Hustle as the bravest and most farsighted example of leadership of his era. All of the climate profiteers and the US’s and the West’s adversaries (Russia, China etc) do not like it. Ultimately though the people will win as affordable energy will make them more prosperous, and less dependent on a socialist-leaning ruling class of elites. The people whose lives will be better for the affordable access to energy and all that it brings (like clean water and sanitation) will like it.
Reminds me of John Adams pushing Jay’s Treaty through, despite livid opposition and being fully aware that he was committing political suicide. History has since vindicated Jay’s Treaty. History will vindicate the Paris pullout in due course.
Both men are that rarest of political creature, one who’s a leader first and a politician second.
Poor Tom, just another Trump deranged muppet. !!
You should be getting well used to LOSING by now, Tom, as the rest of America WINS.
“nor has he any leadership abilities.”
Yet he is leading the leftists around like a blind goat with a ring in its nose. !
Its hilarious to watch. 🙂
And even more hilarious that leftists, like Tom, don’t even see it. 🙂
Too bad Tom is one of the leftists who insists on believing that everyone who disagrees with them is evil with no redeeming features. It once again is making Tom sound like a hate filled fool.
Mr Trump could most certainly put his shoulder to the wheel, but due to the fact that he is fat, and never exercises, any effort he expends would amount to nothing. Oh….he has no idea what manual labor is, due to his upbringing.
I see you have absorbed the latest loony Leftwing news media meme.
It doesn’t take long for the Left to sing in chorus.
Trump’s doctor says he is in very good physical and mental shape and all the Leftwing News Media can do is try to make something out of Trump’s weight. They grilled the doctor for an hour trying to get some kind of theme to bash Trump with and this is all they could come up with.
Trump’s doctor said Trump was healthy enough to run for a second term. You know leftist heads exploded over that comment. 🙂
Elections are choices, A or B usually in the US.
Hillary couldn’t even stand up at the 9/11 memorial ceremony for 60 minutes. Her health is horrible. She regularly has extended coughing fits at speaking engagements and it is likely due to a swallowing reflex impairment that causes her aspiration of saliva into the airways. She likely has some Parkinson’s-like neurological illness that she takes medication to control.
He is going on 72, has never smoked, drank or done drugs. He has some minor calisification of the arteries, which really doesn’t mean heart desease in the true sense. A lot of folk 65 are already dead from a heart attack and no symptom of any arterial or heart condition. It is 50-50 why people get heart attacks, and some folk with clogged arteries live to 101. Give his state of health a rest, please.
And another thing Tom, just so that anyone else reading WUWT thinks that comments are edited or erased, the fact you made multiple slurious comments in this thread alone should be proof enough to anyone reading that WUWT is true democratic Forum. Make some intelligent discussion Tom, and I am sure many here would be happy to debate you. Sincerely….
How much does Hillary weigh?
You sound like an idiot,attack the person not his believe,
And here I thought the Liberal Left was a champion against bodyshaming. Silly me! They should update their nutritional concepts by reading the PURE Study, which was summarized as “PURE found that high carbohydrate intake was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death, while both total fat and saturated and unsaturated fats were associated with a decreased risk of death. However, fat consumption was not associated with cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular mortality, though saturated fat had an inverse association with stroke.” See a very readable summary at and the actual paper at (behind a paywall, unfortunately).
Let’s try this again. For some reason, the links dropped off. The PURE study description is at https://www.medpagetoday.com/meetingcoverage/esc/67566
and the paper itself is at http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2817%2932252-3/fulltext .
Mr. Trump is certainly a Very Stable Genius, Tom.
And the best part is that he is President, and you are not.
Because someone of your caliber wouldn’t have come even close to his first-year accomplishments.
I absolutely love watching lefties running around in ever-multiplying mental epicycles with ‘progressive’ dogmatic axioms colliding head-on like protons in a super-collider. Did you just fat-shame the President Tom? Did you just do that? Are you perhaps a fat-shaming, Islamophobic, misogynistic, racist, microagressing homophobe Tom? Did you just do “hate speech” on the President Tom old son? OMG and ‘pon my soul but I do believe you did!
Silly cephus0, hate speech against SCUM (Straight Conservative Uncolored Males) doesn’t count. 😉
What is about you leftists and your desire to believe that unless someone is sweating, they aren’t working?
Tom [snip – let’s get into ad homs -mod]
Well if you ignore the 12 year hiatus in hurricanes this might make sense. But someone who experienced the 1930’s in the US may give you an argument on the second point.
The US’s emissions are falling, but the increase in plant growth from increasing CO2 emissions has to be credited to China and India.
Speaking of fake news, here’s the long awaited award show:
http://thegatewaypundit.com/2018/01/fake-news-awards-announced-president-trump-announces-much-anticipated-fakenews-awards/
Trump needs to make a list of every lie that the Leftwing News Media told about him from the time he started running for president. The list would have hundreds of entries.
Before that happens, maybe we should look at all of Trump’s lies: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431755/donald-trumps-huge-lies
..
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/05/toronto_star_compiles_list_of_almost_500_trump_lies_during_campaign.html
Hey, Tom B….
I voted for Trump because he’s a man.
hahahahaaa
Alan,
I voted for Trump because he wasn’t Hillary.
If you believe Slate’s list of lies, you have, by definition, let Slate lie to you, Tom.
It must be embarrassing to be so gullible you allow yourself to be brainwashed by the Left.
Remember–the same people that brought you the Russian Collusion Unicorn, Hillary’s subterfuge of the primary over Bernie, and the whitewash of her criminal behavior while Sec. of State also bring you Slate.
For someone who considers himself informed, you are the antithesis of the term.
Tom goes to ultra-leftist sites, which produce LIE after LIE after LIE,
and TOM is GULLIBLE enough to believe them.
I saw a report that 90% of the Trump coverage in the past year was negative.
On the other hand humorists said the reason why they never made jokes about Obama was because he never made a mistake.
I see Tom is going to try and push the old left wing mantra, “anything I disagree with is a lie”.
“If you believe Slate’s list of lies, you have, by definition, let Slate lie to you”
The Leftwing Media starts out misinterpreting everything Tump says, and then when reality doesn’t match their misinterpretation, they claim Trump is lying.
If the threat of global environmental collapse is so great, the rest of the world shouldn’t mind filling in the monetary gaps supposedly left by the American withdrawal from the Paris agreement. This would entail far more carbon pricing, which consumers and businesses wouldn’t tolerate, so there’s not much chance of these moves. I get the impression that the Guardian’s alarmist rhetoric has much more to do with the US refusal to keep bankrolling Green initiatives in other countries and seeing little return for their largesse. As for the extreme weather events of the past year, the alarmists won’t have a case for these being the norm until they occur with the regularity of the Asian monsoon or the typically cold winters experienced in northern North America or Siberia.
No, they don’t mind:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/trump-climate-change-funding-france-uk-vow-make-up-money-paris-agreement-a8057546.html
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/01/trump-withdraw-paris-climate-deal-world-leaders-react
roflmao..
The panic from Mirky, Micron and Gentli is quite funny.
Do you really think they can make up for USA contributions?
They were hoping to actually use some of it themselves
Do you really think that can change the Paris toilet paper so Trump would want to use it?
We have already seen them backing down on reaching CO2 targets while USA has actually achieved big reductions.
So funny that you are totally INCAPABLE of keeping up with reality.
And really griff, its no wonder you are so nil-informered if all you read are the ultra-left propaganda BBC, Dependant and Gruniad.
A lot of people don’t realize it but increased CO2 = more nutrients for plants. increased CO2 improves the food supply and plants also produce Oxygen for us to breathe. So plants are a “sink” for CO2 increases, and they do NOT hurt the environment but rather help put food on the table of our overpopulated world. In addition, we are now coming out of the “little ice age” and the Earth has gradually been warming from that for hundreds of years, but at a far slower rate than initially. Further, the sun and the local galactic environment largely determine our climate on the broad scale, depending on the degree of solar activity, cosmic dust, and the occasional cometary impact (which we are largely well overdue for). A far more important greenhouse gas is methane, but it’s not as sexy as CO2 and it’s impossible for governments to tax and regulate, so it is not talked about.
you forgot to mention increased CO2 significantly reduces nutrients in major food crops
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27308720
Griff……maybe 10% is not significant
Crop doubles, nutrient density shrinks a percent or two.
For some reason, this worries the Griff.
Consider also the standard leftist exaggeration percentage markup factor of 3X – 5X. You have to correct for that.
WRONG,
CO2 actually ENHANCES bacterial nitrogen fixing within the soil.
Farmers know how to work with crops , those researchers did not.
Interesting study Griff, I would be curious as to how they maintained their proposed 2050 CO2 levels (550 ppm? article doesn’t state) in “Open Field” conditions. Or how they included natural evolution of the wheat grain over 30 generations of gradually increasing CO2 levels.
Sounds like the temperature/acidification fish studies where they dump the fish into a shocked water source and expect the fish to survive without the possibility of evolution creating the changes needed to do so over 30 – 50 generations
“likely to be reduced by up to 10%”
Lots of slop in this statement.
And don’t see how 10% is significant.
If 10% is true, then when they eat 10 oz of wheat, they can add an extra 1.1 ounces to their meals to get their 100%.
Wonder if soil overuse and degradation plays a role?
“We have been pushing our planet to the brink and the damage is becoming increasingly clear.”
These people are beyond crazy, and yet they are “world leaders” of some sort. Their words bear no relation to reality whatsoever. We live in bizarre times indeed.
“We live in bizarre times indeed.”
Yes we do. About half the population is out of touch with reality.
TA,
Yes, they are LEFT out!
It’s a frightening thing and they are becoming ever more violent in enforcing their fantasies on everyone. Could we be heading for the great red pill / blue pill wars? It really wouldn’t surprise me anymore.
I think we are going to have a political war. The U.S. Congress has obtained documents from the Justice Department and the FBI that are being called bombshells because they supposedly show that the Obama administration was using the DOJ and the FBI to wage a political war on Donald Trump and Republicans.
This whole Trump/Russia collusion BS has been a setup from the very beginning. The Democrats, including Hillary and the Obama administration orchestrated this Big Lie about Trump in an effort to cause him to lose the election, and after he won the election, to try to undermine Trump and perhaps get Trump removed from Office or make him so impotent that he can’t do anything.
The Republican members of Congress who have read these new documents say they were shocked, and one said it was even worse than he feared, and that the corruption goes to the highest levels of the DOJ and FBI (Obama’s appointees).
The documents supposedly name names and detail all the skulduggery. I have even heard Hillary’s hitman, Sid (Vicious) Blumenthal’s name mentioned around this.
It looks like treason to me. I don’t see how this was done without Obama knowing about it. It looks like the truth is going to come out.
So we may just have a political war because the Democrats are going to try to do everything they can to stop anyone from looking here, but it looks like a pretty sure bet the documents are going to be released so the public can see them and decide for themselves, so the Democrats don’t appear to be in a position to stop the truth from coming out, and when it does, it is going to show just how corrupt the Obama administration was, and the Hillary Crime Family and the Democrat Party. We and Trump will be talking about how treasonous and untrustworthy the Democrat Party is from now until at least the 2018 midterms.
Sounds like political dynamite. We are going to see just how close we came to having our nation taken over by a Criminal Crime Syndicate. The Good Lord smiled on us Nov. 8, 2016.
So expect the Left and the Leftwing News Media go into a frenzy as soon as these documents become public. Right now, they are trying to ignore that they exist.
All the U.S. House has to do is to vote to release the documents, and that won’t take long. A few days.
Next they’ll be claiming we’re wearing out the water and air.
I think this report clearly demonstrates the the WEF is just a front for those who want ‘one world government’, and therefore should be studiously ignored (or better, avoided) by all rational people.
“Keep President Trump from harm”?
I must admit that when I say my prayers at night, keeping the Trumpster from harm is not my first thought. But if you guys think it’s important I’ll add him to the list.
That’s real generous of you, scraft1. Trump can use our prayers. Our country can use our prayers. The world can use our prayers.
More swamp to drain globally
The new UN Secretary General recently steered well-clear of the climate hustle in laying out his goals for the UN. So there is hope that the UN will downplay the Climate Hustle while Trump is in office in order to keep US money flowing in to the UN.
The UN cannot “downplay” anything since they are the source of the AGW hysteria. They may ignore it but it won’t go away.
The US needs to defund the UN completely and boot their odious presence off American soil or if it is deemed smart to keep a seat at the table defund it to the absolute minimum required to keep that seat. I would also recommend in this latter case insisting that it is someone else’s honour to host the UN and it would be unfair of the US to keep that signal honour in perpetuity.
Kick the UN out, and get someone who will actually pay their taxes and parking tickets into that building.
What an absolute hoot. Trump is not the kind of person I’d invite to my home for dinner, but crikey, he’s causing heads to explode in all the right places. The funniest part is that these people are so deranged by him that their rantings almost guarantee that he’ll be re-elected in 2020.
I don’t know, I would love to hear some of the inside baseball stories that I’m sure he could tell.
It is not their rantings which will re-elect Trump, it will be the results of his first term policies which will see him re-elected. By the end of his first term, the effects of the policies carried out will be clearly visible and he will win more comfortably than the first time.
Just imagine how many more heads will have exploded in seven more years.
SteveT
“nation-state unilateralism” would make it harder to tackle global warming and ecological damage.” Oh no, not nation-state unilateralism! God forbid! People that agree with one another are now pigeon holed into the dastardly “nation-state unilateralism”.
“When risk cascades through a complex system, the danger is not of incremental damage but of “runaway collapse” or an abrupt transition to a new, suboptimal status quo.”
Yes, and that is exactly why this insane CAGW nonsense must stop. Killing the world to save it is insane. If it’s not stopped, we could have runaway poverty, war and massive environmental damage. It has to stop now.
It doesn’t take much to draw people like Tom Bjorklund out does it
People like that are constantly looking for an excuse to be triggered.
If I may make an observation, you seem pretty ‘triggered’ when I post something?
Perhaps it’s because you only lecture and never really engage people.
Very ironic… i pointed out recently that there is very little difference between the m.o. of griff and that of markw. (troll 1 & troll 2) They both shoot spit balls once and don’t return any fire. This, i think, is the only really effective way to troll. i also think mark is much better at it than griff. (he’s also nastier)…
“when I post something?”
Its called “mirth” griff.
You comments are so banal, and always so misguided and nil-educated, that they are laughable.