World Economic Forum: President Trump Paris Decision Increases the Threat of a Global Environmental Collapse

Official White House Photo of President Trump

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.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/17/us-unilateralism-makes-tacking-climate-change-harder-wef-warns

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.” …

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/11/us-groups-honouring-paris-climate-pledges-despite-trump

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.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Pop Piasa

What in Sam Hill is “Global Environmental Collapse”?

ANSWER: Mythology

barryjo

“Mythology”??? That is being charitable.

The Rick

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

Greg

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 !

Hot under the collar

“Global Environmental Collapse”? Isn’t that what happens when government spends more on some environment fantasy than it receives in income?

Bryan A

If we’re lucky, the article simply forgot the “ism” part and it will be the collapse of Global Environmentalism

Mark Hinge

Religion. 🙂

toorightmate

Thank you David.
I enjoyed that more than Naked Gun 3.

AndyG55

Tears !…..those poor melting snowflakes. 🙂

Pat Frank

Is that Harvey Weinstein in the background?

nc

Media melt down over Trump election, hilarious.

joelobryan

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

Warren Blair

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!

tom s

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.

Craig

How does someone get that misguided?

kaliforniakook

Oh, that refreshed my very soul!

Latitude

” environmental collapse”!!!!……………..ROTFL

eyesonu

How can you be rolling on the floor laughing? ….. The sky is falling !!!!!!

RockyRoad

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!

eyesonu

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. 😉

BallBounces

If we don’t do $omething to $top the runaway train of climate change, our children may not know what climate is.

MarkW

It’s what happens to a leftists when the funding spigot is turned off.

Karl Baumgarten

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.

Geoff

Free money runs out causing collapse of the environmental movement, ergo “Global Environmental Collapse”!

rogerthesurf

I thought it meant total “Collapse of Environmental Organizations” – maybe it does 🙂

Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com

Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

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

paqyfelyc

makes sense.
Coping with real issues cost money. coping with non-issues (like CO2) is business opportunity.

Roaddog

That’s that thing that Barney Frank and Bill Clinton set off by deciding that everyone in America should own a home.

gnomish
Pop Piasa

“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.

GoatGuy

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

Ron Long

I like President Trumps Paris withdrawal bigly. It’s yuge! Maybe the environmentalists can gain refuge status?

joelobryan

Some of the climateer rent-seekers are already relocating to France. Good riddance.

RockyRoad

Those “environmentalists” were so embarrassingly ineffective they should still be able to gather annually in remote, CO2-intensive locations and worship their anthropogenic idols.

AndyG55

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.

Sara

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.

joelobryan

They should send out a tweet with #hashtag: #waahhhh
I sure Trump would lose sleep over that.

TA

“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.

Tom Bjorklund

Calling people names is infantile behavior. I’m glad you approve of such behavior from Trump.

Extreme Hiatus

It is also called branding Tom. Works great for advertisers, and for Trump.

Sheri

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.

RockyRoad

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.

AndyG55

Seems like Tom is mostly “snowflake”..

poor petal !!

afonzarelli

(Bjerklund)…

“Tom Bjorklund January 17, 2018 at 6:33 pm
Calling people names is infantile behavior. I’m glad you approve of such behavior from Trump.”

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.

Barbara

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

Barbara

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

Latitude

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/

TA

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.

Tom Bjorklund

I wouldn’t spend the 38 billion on the wall. Trump said he’d make Mexico pay for it.

TA

That should have been $3 to $4 TRILLION that is stuck overseas.

TA

“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.

Tom Bjorklund

” 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.

Tom Bjorklund

“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.

Tom Bjorklund

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.

Tom Bjorklund

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?

joelobryan

Tom, you should change your screen name to Triggered Tom.

Alan Robertson

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.

Extreme Hiatus

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?

Tom Bjorklund

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.

Tom Bjorklund

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?

TA

“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.

Tom Bjorklund

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?

Tom Bjorklund

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.

Extreme Hiatus

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.

sy computing

“*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!

sy computing

“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!!

Extreme Hiatus

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.

Tom Bjorklund

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!

Tom Bjorklund

“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.

sy computing

“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

Tom Bjorklund

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.

Tom Bjorklund

“given your belief system”

Unfortunately, you don’t have a clue as to what my “belief” system is comporised of.

sy computing

“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?

Tom Bjorklund

TYPO: comprised.

Tom Bjorklund

“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.)

sy computing

“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!

Extreme Hiatus

“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

Tom Bjorklund

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)

Tom Bjorklund

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

RockyRoad

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!

Extreme Hiatus

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.

AndyG55

“Mister Ignorant of Economics”

Yes, calling people names really is JUVENILE, isn’t it Tom.

MarkW

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.

MarkW

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.

MarkW

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.

Extreme Hiatus

Al Gore is on their Board of Trustees. And some of the other usual suspects.

https://www.weforum.org/about/leadership-and-governance

Curious George

The swamp is wide and deep.

Sean

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.

TA

“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.

Justanelectrician

That’s funny, TA. Not as funny as triggering Bjorklund, but close.

TA

I think Trump is the one that triggered him. He has that effect on a certain segment of society.

Robert

Amazing how an actuelle leader can change things! You can always tell if it’s good or bad from the whiners.

commieBob

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.

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.

Extreme Hiatus

“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.

joelobryan

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.

Barbara

“America’s Pledge Phase One Report”

Includes supporters.

Read at:
https://www.bbhub.io/dotorg/sites/28/2017/11/AmericasPledgePhaseOneReportWeb.pdf

joelobryan

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.

RockyRoad

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.

Robert

An American is someone unafraid to put their shoulder to the wheel. Mr.Trump is such a person!

joelobryan

It takes guts and leadership to go against the crowd when it is wrong.

Tom Bjorklund

Too bad Trump has neither guts nor has he any leadership abilities.

joelobryan

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.

President Harry S. Truman wrote in his 1955 memoirs,
“A leader is a man who has the ability to get other people to do what they don’t want to do, and like it.”

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.

drednicolson

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.

AndyG55

Poor Tom, just another Trump deranged muppet. !!

You should be getting well used to LOSING by now, Tom, as the rest of America WINS.

AndyG55

“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. 🙂

MarkW

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.

Tom Bjorklund

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.

TA

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. 🙂

joelobryan

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.

Earthling2

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….

Extreme Hiatus

How much does Hillary weigh?

Robert

You sound like an idiot,attack the person not his believe,

Indiana Sue

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).

Indiana Sue

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 .

RockyRoad

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!

drednicolson

Silly cephus0, hate speech against SCUM (Straight Conservative Uncolored Males) doesn’t count. 😉

MarkW

What is about you leftists and your desire to believe that unless someone is sweating, they aren’t working?

PiperPaul

Tom [snip – let’s get into ad homs -mod]

This follows a year characterised by high-impact hurricanes, extreme temperatures and the first rise in CO2 emissions for four years.

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.

Extreme Hiatus
TA

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.

Tom Bjorklund
Alan Robertson

Hey, Tom B….
I voted for Trump because he’s a man.
hahahahaaa

joelobryan

Alan,
I voted for Trump because he wasn’t Hillary.

RockyRoad

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.

AndyG55

Tom goes to ultra-leftist sites, which produce LIE after LIE after LIE,

and TOM is GULLIBLE enough to believe them.

MarkW

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.

MarkW

I see Tom is going to try and push the old left wing mantra, “anything I disagree with is a lie”.

TA

“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.

Edward Katz

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.

AndyG55

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.

AndyG55

And really griff, its no wonder you are so nil-informered if all you read are the ultra-left propaganda BBC, Dependant and Gruniad.

michael yaros

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.

Griff

you forgot to mention increased CO2 significantly reduces nutrients in major food crops
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27308720

Latitude

Griff……maybe 10% is not significant

MarkW

Crop doubles, nutrient density shrinks a percent or two.
For some reason, this worries the Griff.

PiperPaul

Consider also the standard leftist exaggeration percentage markup factor of 3X – 5X. You have to correct for that.

AndyG55

WRONG,

CO2 actually ENHANCES bacterial nitrogen fixing within the soil.

Farmers know how to work with crops , those researchers did not.

Bryan A

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.

Bryan A

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?

Bruce Cobb

“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.

TA

“We live in bizarre times indeed.”

Yes we do. About half the population is out of touch with reality.

Clyde Spencer

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.

TA

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.

RockyRoad

Next they’ll be claiming we’re wearing out the water and air.

BoyfromTottenham

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.

scraft1

“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.

TA

That’s real generous of you, scraft1. Trump can use our prayers. Our country can use our prayers. The world can use our prayers.

ResouceGuy

More swamp to drain globally

joelobryan

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.

markl

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.

MarkW

Kick the UN out, and get someone who will actually pay their taxes and parking tickets into that building.

rubberduck

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.

MarkW

I don’t know, I would love to hear some of the inside baseball stories that I’m sure he could tell.

SteveT

rubberduck
January 17, 2018 at 6:57 pm

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.

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

markl

“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”.

Sheri

“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.

Robert

It doesn’t take much to draw people like Tom Bjorklund out does it

MarkW

People like that are constantly looking for an excuse to be triggered.

Griff

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.

afonzarelli

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)…

AndyG55

“when I post something?”

Its called “mirth” griff.

You comments are so banal, and always so misguided and nil-educated, that they are laughable.

Clyde Spencer

Eric Worral,
“unilateralism makes TACKING climate change harder…?”

willhaas

The reality is that the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. Wasiting money trying to solve problems that cannot be solved cannot possible be good for the economy. The USA is already very deep in debt and waisting money is of no benefit to the USA. If you want to get conutries to waste money then try to get the countries with the huge trade surpluses to waste it and not the debtor nations like the USA. To date, Mankind has been unable to change one extreme weather evernt let along change global climate.

Earthling2

“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.”
I feel compelled to bring forth the greatest threat to President Trump that he will ever face. It is the recent announcement by AG Jefferson Sessions that the Federal Gov’t will give Federal prosecuters the ability to make good on Federal law regarding Marijuana legalization and possibly allow federal prosecution in states that have legalized it. This would be absolute political Suicide since that is probably the only thing that would unite millennials to organize and defeat Trump, both at the mid terms, and the next general election.
Most people that vote know that all this Climate Hustle is just that; a giant consir@cy to take control of the planet for nebulous purposes. And separate many of us from our hard earned money. Even the millennials don’t really care enough about the climate hustle to actually organize or get out and vote. But start throwing them in jail again for a bag of weed, and I guarantee you that Trump will face an execution squad at the next round of elections.
The war on marijuana is Lost. I personally don’t really agree with legalization of pot, since Govt can’t really get anything right. It probably should have just been decriminalized 40 years ago and leave it at that. But there is taxes to be collected, so sure, Ok, collect some revenue while you are at it for States’ Rights.
I saw this happen in Canada, where Trudeau promised to legalize it, and the millennials organized in force and delivered a million votes to the Liberals and a majority Govt. While Harper maintained his criminality posture on the issue. When we see Alabama lose a long held Republican voice, we can see how precarious politics really is. Write your Congressmen and Senators and tell them to tell AG Sessions to lay off enforcement of Federal Pot laws. There is far too much to be lost for a measly bag of weed.

sy computing

“There is far too much to be lost for a measly bag of weed.”

Far too much indeed…

Exclusive: Traffic fatalities linked to marijuana are up sharply in Colorado. Is legalization to blame?
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/25/colorado-marijuana-traffic-fatalities/

Colorado has passed the grim 600 mark for 2017 roadway deaths as state trends towards eclipsing last year’s tally
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/12/18/colorado-roadway-deaths-2017/

Colorado Traffic Fatalities up 24 Percent in Two Years
https://www.codot.gov/news/2017-news/january/colorado-traffic-fatalities-up-24-percent-in-two-years

5 reasons Colorado car insurance rates are about to skyrocket
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/5-reasons-colorado-car-insurance-rates-are-going-up

To anticipate the “screaming at the sky” objections along with the plethora of links ostensibly debunking the theory goes without saying, so:

“Of course it COULDN’T have anything to do with pot…dude!”

Extreme Hiatus

Sy, that is because of Global Warming. It is worse than we thought. People are so stressed out by climate change that they are forced to smoke weed. They should probably sue Exxon, when they get around to it.

Earthling2

Excellent point sy…I don’t agree with the way it is being legalized. But it isn’t going away either.

My point is not about the merits of a bag of weed, but rather losing an entire battle over a bag of weed.

sy computing

“My point is not about the merits of a bag of weed, but rather losing an entire battle over a bag of weed.”

I gotcha E2. I suppose it comes down to what one is willing to trade if one must. I hope it doesn’t come to that. I’m not necessarily as convinced as you are that weed is the straw on the camel’s back for the young ‘uns right now.

Millennial’s appear to favor a lot more dangerous and stupid ideas than weed legalization, as is evidenced by their overwhelming support of “Krazy” Bernie Sanders in the last US election cycle. He might’ve been preaching weed legalization, but such wasn’t his main focus.

sy computing

“They should probably sue Exxon, when they get around to it.”

Indeed EH…why not?

After all, when you’re a moron, it’s always someone else’s fault when bad things happen to you.

Colorado Lawsuit Claims Marijuana Edibles Caused People to ‘Overdose’
https://news.vice.com/article/colorado-lawsuit-claims-marijuana-edibles-caused-people-to-overdose

🙂

drednicolson

Legalization doesn’t stop drug smuggling. It just changes the direction of travel. ;|

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7

Earthling2:

Whether to enforce a law is not among the discretionary powers of the Attorney General or even the President, 8 years of counter examples by President Obama notwithstanding.

The federal laws criminalizing individual possession and use of marijuana were passed by Congress and have been litigated and upheld in the courts, including the US Supreme Court. Many people disagree, but as a matter of process the laws have been passed, signed and upheld. The duty of the President is to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” (Article 2, Section 3). The authority and duty of the Attorney General derive from this provision.

Former President Obama issued a directive to federal prosecutors to ignore this one particular law rather than go though the legal process (and political risk) of getting Congress to pass a repeal and putting his signature to it.

What AG Sessions did was to reverse Obama’s unconstitutional directive. The issue is back where it should be — the Congress. I can certainly understand why people might doubt their good faith, will and ability to discharge their duty, but it remains their duty regardless. Vote for a better Congress.

Whether to enforce a law is not among the discretionary powers of the Attorney General or even the President, 8 years of counter examples by President Obama notwithstanding.

The budgets set the limits. That the AG takes these limits into account is not a violation.

We have more laws than we have money to enforce.

The purpose of the Legislature is to make criminals. When that exceeds rationality they run short of funds.

What a surprise.

Also note: The Supreme Court can say what it wants. No Drug Prohibition Amendment has been passed. The Federal Government (whatever it claims) doesn’t have the power. Legally. Not that “legally” ever stopped them.

AGW is not Science

All drugs should be legalized, regulated and taxed. The “War on Drugs” is not only a failure of epic proportions, it is also a textbook, classic case of the failure to learn from history. We have done this before. It was called Prohibition. Prohibition did not stop the production, distribution or use of alcohol, it simply moved production and distribution into the black market, in the process putting huge sums of money into the hands of gangs and street thugs, causing massive violence and corruption.

The “War on Drugs” has not stopped the production, distribution or use of drugs, either. It has simply transferred the production and distribution into the black market, in the process putting huge sums of money into the hands of “cartels,” gangs and street thugs, causing massive violence. Sound familiar?!

Making drugs illegal, as opposed to having them be legal AND subject to regulation and taxation, increases their cost (increasing property crimes for those who steal to support their habit), makes their availability easier for those who wouldn’t be permitted to buy them as “regulated” legal substances, takes a huge stream of tax revenue away from the government (thereby requiring MORE taxation of those who follow the rules), and results in massive amounts of violence and corruption. Other than pig-headed “morality” concerns, just what is supposed to be the “benefit” of keeping drugs illegal?

Don’t get me wrong – I am not a “promoter” of drug use. Far from it. I don’t even drink alcohol. If you’re going to tell me how “bad” drugs are, you’re preaching to the choir, and have no argument with me. But to continue this stupidity causes much more harm than good. And for everyone who feels compelled to tell their anecdotal stories about someone they know whose life has been “ruined by drugs,” don’t bother – the same stories can be told about alcohol, and yet it’s legal. And making drugs illegal ISN’T stopping anybody who persists in using drugs from doing so. This is something we should have learned the first time around. Kids can get their hands on drugs more easily than they can get their hands on beer. That single fact should tell everyone with a lick of sense how colossally stupid the “War on Drugs” really is.

Griff

Portugal kept drugs illegal, but treated them as a public health issue instead.

Here’s a summary of how it went:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/portugal-decriminalised-drugs-14-years-ago-and-now-hardly-anyone-dies-from-overdosing-10301780.html

drednicolson

Prohibition was achieving the goal it was intended to achieve. Alcohol consumption in the general population significantly decreased during the Prohibition years. We repealed it not because it was a failure, but because we changed our minds about it.

I expect there will be just as much drug smuggling after legalizing as before. Just as much violence and corruption and black market deals. Only the directions of travel would change. Instead of smuggling to avoid proscription, it would be smuggling to avoid the taxes and regulation. Arrests for possession of a controlled substance would still happen, just under a different name. Prohibition = regulation, Regulation = control.

drednicolson

P.S. Making murder illegal isn’t stopping anybody who persists in murdering from doing so.

sy computing

“P.S. Making murder illegal isn’t stopping anybody who persists in murdering from doing so.”

But no one is advocating we make murder legal…

Are they?

sy computing

“Instead of smuggling to avoid proscription, it would be smuggling to avoid the taxes and regulation.”

Hear! Hear!

E.g:

New York’s high cigarette taxes fuel black market sales
http://www.pressrepublican.com/news/local_news/new-york-s-high-cigarette-taxes-fuel-black-market-sales/article_e111a537-55b4-518f-91fe-6dd57269e8b9.html

Exactly my point to some who say legalize drugs and tax them to take out the black market and all the bad things that go with it.

Fail.

tom s

I absolutely concur. Sessions should keep his trap shut on this matter!

John Robertson

Good tidings, times are so tough that Gang Green will have to put their hands in their own pockets.
Without the USA volunteering to be the mug, the concerned ones would have to put up their own funds to “save the planet”, which will never happen.
These parasites are just that,they always are prepared to be generous with our money,as long as they get a cut.But when asked to spend their own ill gotten gains, “Oh no, we are too good.”

Amber

Well actually President Trump has done a great service to tax payers who were about to be ripped off $Billions through the Paris Pledge . Not only that, he has given other countries an off ramp to the stupidest
most expensive scam in history . My oh my Germany and Great Britain now coming out with surprise
announcements they are not any where near their targets and the fuel poverty deaths are just too much collateral damage for a fraud.
Thank You President Trump ! At least someone has courage .

AndyG55

+100 Amber. comment image

ResourceGuy

+101

AGW is not Science

Make it 102 ;-D

Leitwolf

Ceres (panetoid)
Distance from sun: 2.767 AU
Albedo: 0.09
average temperature: 167-168K

Theoretic temperature: (279 / 2.767^0.5) * (1-0.09)^0.25 = 163.8K
GHE: 167.5 – 163.8 = ~3.7K
Atmosphere: none

Just one example. We can identify GHEs all through the solar system, even where there are no atmospheres. Yet we do as if Earth had a GHE, or rather as if the GHE was owed to H2O or CO2, rather than a flawed formula.

The Third EYE

100 years from now all these Globalist Green Cult Psychos of Clean energy and Global Warming scam will be dead and the Earth shall and will go on. Because the Earth will always go on and on.

ResourceGuy

+10

Trump won. Dems go sobbing nuts.
Now US left Paris Accord, although disappointedly the long rather than short route. Polar bears thriving! World greening! Sea level rise not accelerating! Tax cut gives $1000 Pelosi crumbs to 2 million Deplorables! Apple bringing back $350 billion in next 5 years! Fiat Chrysler bringing Ram truck assembly back to US from Mexico! Toyota investing $1.5 billion in Alabama! Lowest Afro-Am unemployment since 1970s! Noko Rocket Boy negotiating with SoKo for joint Olympics appearance! Dems so distraught they threaten to shut down USG if don’t get what they want over DACA, despite clear Trump negotiation tradeoffs. Teump scores 30/30 on MCI at Walter Reed and cleverly sends mental MSM detractors nuts.
MAGA.

drednicolson

It’s only obstructionism when Republicans do it, amirite Obama? ;|

MarkW

Back when Reagan was president and the Dems controlled congress. The media proclaimed that the president had to follow the lead of congress because congress represented the will of the people.
A few years later we had Clinton as president and a Republican congress. The media proclaimed that congress needed to follow the president’s lead, because the president was the only politician who had been elected by all of the people.

Leftists change their story based on whatever will get them the win, with no hint of embarrassment or shame.

J Mac

“It would be better if we saw leadership from the White House,….”
The socialists attending Davos and participating in WEF don’t have a clue what real leadership is.

A pro-American/pro-business President Trump administration combined with low cost reliable ‘fracked’ oil and gas has allowed the USA to shed the 8 year malaise of Obama crony socialism and become a vibrant and growing economy once more. The entire world reaps the benefits, from both the technology created and the low cost reliable energy that results.

Thank you, Capitalism! Thank you, Technology! Thank you, Big Oil! And Thank You, President Trump!

Warren Blair

Tom Bjorklund seek help.
All politicians lie just like you do (many times each week).
They also change their mind like you.
They’re also opportunistic like you and every other human being.
One thing’s for certain Tom, you currently think left-wing politicians rarely lie and right-wing lie frequently.
You’re fever is contributing to the political/societal lie game so dominant in the USA.
You lost.
One day we’ll be in that position.
In the meantime, your negativity will achieve nothing.
Do something positive and work hard to reform your own ‘party’ which is in some need of positive change.

Griff
MarkW

A nothing left wing nut case who counts everything he disagrees with as a lie.
BTW, these were the same guys who declared that the reason why they didn’t make jokes about Obama was because he never made any mistakes.

tom s

Kimmel is a crying little ugly baby. Wouldn’t tune him in unless I were paid very very handsomely for the endeavor.

sy computing

It’s the Washington Post Griff…so we have to ask how it is they think they have the moral authority to point out the beam in Trump’s eye without first pulling out their own Redwood log?

Moreover, we likely ought to discount about 70% of whatever they’re saying Trump lied about, hence that gets us down to around 600 or so.

And then there’s the fact that Trump is, after all, a former Democrat. Maybe old natures really are hard to break?

We’ll see as time goes on.

Pete

Did they mean ‘global environment-oriented firms’ collapse? The money guzzlers, those global operators who have been enjoying massive subsidies for decades are now in a very real danger of losing their power to continue robbing us of our tax money, and this may not necessarily be due to Trump’s incumbency. Other governments are reducing subsidies to green technology operators, telling the that enough is enough. Germany and Britain have already reduced green subsidies, but nobody is making any issues out of it.

Trump is being demonised for being Trump, saying it like it is.

Tim

The only ‘risks facing the international community’ are the risks facing the international corporates that want to override the laws of sovereign states through bought and paid for politicians for their own profit and power. The manufactured environmental fear is a means to that end. BTW, let’s not politely call them businesses – the correct term is Multinational Corporates.

“It would be better if we saw leadership from the White House” That’s exactly what they are seeing – in spades.

The reason no one is making an issue out of European countries and the UK rowing back on green schist is that they are all in the total grip of the globalists and the globalists own the press, academia and almost all of the ‘politicians’. They are now forced into that rowing back or Trump’s America will economically leave them for dead and imagine how that is going to make them look if global temperatures take a bit of a dip for a while. The climate hustle only works if everyone is in on the deal. Trump’s role as the little boy laughing at the Climate Emperor’s nakedness is fantastic to watch. Thing is though Trump is the small boy but with a mighty punch indeed.

They are concerned that President Trump is withdrawing from the global climate agreements and that this will trigger the transfer of vast sums of US taxpayer’s cash away from CAGW Carpet Baggers and back to the benefit of the U.S. population as a whole.
They are indeed seeing “leadership from the White House”!

NorwegianSceptic

“US unilateralism makes TAXING climate change harder”.
There – fixed.

Bruce Cobb

In addition to TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome), the folks at WEF clearly suffer from a severe, virulent form of DDS (Debby Downer’s Syndrome).

Michael Jankowski

“…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….”

So 2 of the 5 are “natural disasters” and “human-made natural disasters.” I’d love to see how they defined the latter. The former would have nothing to do with Paris, of course.

On top of that, they have “extreme weather events”…when those are of any importance, aren’t those typically “natural disasters?”

“Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse”…that’s due to pulling out of Paris?

Pretty hokey if you ask me.

Fraizer

…and “human-made natural disasters.” I’d love to see how they defined the latter. The former would have nothing to do with Paris, of course.

It has everything to do with Paris, an in the Paris no-go zones. “Human-made natural disasters is a leftist code phrase for Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

Sara

I am fascinate by the use of panic-ridden language and terminology. This is one example of obvious attempts to strike fear into the hearts (and tiny minds) of greenies.

“We have been pushing our planet to the brink and the damage is becoming increasingly clear.”

I could make a really snarky response to that, because it is pure baloney and the WEF knows it. It’s just another form of fraud foisted on people they think are fools (and yes, some are) to get cash that could be put to better use at home. From what I’ve seen so far, most of it is just fraud.

We are NOT the world’s piggy bank, I’m happy to say. They’ll just have to grow up and fund it all themselves.

AGW is not Science

“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.”

First of all, THREE of the five are THE SAME THING – “extreme WEATHER events,” “NATURAL disasters,” and “human-made NATURAL (LMFAO) disasters.” Basically all three are just “sensationalizing WEATHER events and claiming them to be the “result” of “climate change,” when any honest scientist will tell you that trying to draw a connection between “climate change” and any specific weather event is nonsense.

“Failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation” conveniently groups together two OPPOSITE approaches to “dealing with” changes to the climate. One, attempting to “control” climate by “controlling” something that has never, is not and never will “control” the climate (i.e., CO2) is futile. The other, and only rational response, adaptation, is only going to “fail” if we have squandered the necessary resources and fruits of economic prosperity trying to “mitigate” what we are incapable of controlling.

“Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse” is just a bad joke; no such thing is occurring due to a few ppm CO2 being added to the atmosphere, nor to any almost-too-small-to-accurately-measure temperature change (which in turn, isn’t caused by CO2 level changes to begin with). Ironically, the most significant ecosystem damage being done by “human activity” is the destruction of rainforest to plant “biofuel” crops in pursuit of the non-solution to the AGW non-crisis.

co2islife

How Do You Know A Climate Alarmist Is Lying? Their Lips Are Moving
Claim #1: Few Challenges Facing America – And The World – Are More Urgent Than Combating Climate Change.

Response to Claim #1: Climate Change has always occurred, and it has nothing to do with CO2. CO2 once reached 7000 ppm and there was no catastrophic warming. The earth fell into an ice age when CO2 was 4000 ppm, or 10x the level it is today. Never in the history of the earth has the climate not been changing. A changing climate is the norm, not the exception, and man’s ability to stop climate change is about the same as man’s ability to stop the seasons, and night and day. Fighting climate change is the Quixotic venture of all Quixotic ventures. Terrorism, unfunded pension liabilities, job displacement, poor inner city schools, poor inner-city healthcare, run away college inflation, China blackmailing the US with their US Debt holdings, cleaner water, protecting natural treasures, rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, job training, energy independence, promoting freedom worldwide, etc etc etc. If fact, fighting climate change ranks near dead last on the public’s priorities.
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2018/01/13/how-do-you-know-a-climate-alarmist-is-lying-their-lips-are-moving/

Bruce Cobb

President Trump Paris Decision Increases the Threat of a Global Collapse of Climatist Ideology; Greenies In Full-Blown Panic Mode.
Film at 11.

David Cage

Surely if they are genuinely concerned they would be keen to prove their case by a proper external exam with full public disclosure of all the certification of the stations, the calibration by having surrounding measurement points for a fairly large sample of those stations to show the tolerance of those measurements and how they have proved that changes in the type of instruments from old analogue to modern fast response digital produced no change in the results.
They would be equally keen to show how their estimation of what is normal climate changes met the highest standards of noise filtering and pattern analysis rather than as some of us know have standards that fail to meet those of a first year engineering undergraduate.

Once you apply science it is engineering and should no longer have even the slightest right to be only peer reviewed and should meet proper life critical Quality assurance examination if that is the importance they claim.
Climate scientists are an amoral self serving and despicable crowd who I believe know full well just how bad their work really is.

Griff

Berkley Earth already did that.

ResourceGuy

Meanwhile….

WSJ

…Intramural political feuds rarely warrant much attention, but developments within Britain’s Labour Party this week are a special case. The country’s main opposition that may be the next governing party extended its march to the left.

Party members on Monday elected three loyalists of left-wing leader Jeremy Corbyn to the party’s National Executive Committee, cementing Mr. Corbyn’s grip. One is Jon Lansman, a self-described “radical socialist” who founded Momentum, the group formed to support Mr. Corbyn against party moderates. The other two are also with Momentum.

Mr. Corbyn’s loyalists now hold more than half of the 39 seats on the council, which is comprised of grass-roots members, union representatives and elected politicians. One of the left’s early goals is to change party rules to make it easier to unseat moderate Labour members of parliament in primary-style elections.

Neo

Methinks it was supposed to be … Global Environmental Lobby Ecosystem Collapse

ResourceGuy

Much better

Jonny Scott

Certainly there is an argument for Western economies to collapse should the nonsense of tax payer funded artificial part time energy supplies together with tax payer subsidized silly electric cars become any more prevalent. It can be argued that the last four great civilizations ended because of passing a taxation tipping point…. I wonder how many politicians read history? “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

Gunga Din

In my opinion your President stopped the greatest smash and grab ever attempted, but the risk is still very real.

Greed and Envy are still very alive in the heart of Man.
Forget how such motives are defined in politics. (Socialism, Capitalism, Fascism, Racism, Globalism, etc. etc.)
Poor people can be ruled by Greed. Rich people can be ruled by Envy. (And vice versa)
The danger is those who use both to manipulate all in their desire to Rule all.

JPGuthrie

Being trained in economics, I am always annoyed at modern organizations and publications which use the terms “economic” or “economist,” but are devoid of any semblance to economic principle. They seem to have no understanding of the simple economic concepts of value, or efficiency. The entire climate change movement is not the result of concerned people, politicians, or of activists, but a movement of big business and their partners in the state to enrich themselves at the expense of the taxpayers. The fight against climate change is like any other war, being fought for economic reasons, but like any other war, the public must be made to fear and hate the enemy. A number of such wars are currently being fought, the next biggest being the fight against “financial inequality.”

Griff

but people here keep telling me climate change raises taxes… it is an excuse to raise taxes…

How does big business make money from raised taxes?

some of the biggest companies are energy companies, especially ones in fossil fuel… why would they go along with this?

Are you saying that it is a scam by non-fossil fuel big business?

How are scientists involved if it is the state and big business? Which companies put the scientists up to it?

what on earth is the ‘economic’ benefit to the state and big business? And how come they had to invent and support this massive climate change apparatus to deliver it? I mean surely there was a cheaper option?