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.
Eric Worral,
“unilateralism makes TACKING climate change harder…?”
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.
“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.
“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!”
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.
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.
“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.
“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
🙂
Legalization doesn’t stop drug smuggling. It just changes the direction of travel. ;|
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.
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.
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
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.
P.S. Making murder illegal isn’t stopping anybody who persists in murdering from doing so.
“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?
“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.
I absolutely concur. Sessions should keep his trap shut on this matter!
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.”
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 .
+100 Amber.
+101
Make it 102 ;-D
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.
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.
+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.
It’s only obstructionism when Republicans do it, amirite Obama? ;|
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.
“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!
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.
some right wing politicians may lie frequently?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/arts/television/jimmy-kimmel-trump-2000-lies.html
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.
Kimmel is a crying little ugly baby. Wouldn’t tune him in unless I were paid very very handsomely for the endeavor.
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.
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.
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”!
“US unilateralism makes TAXING climate change harder”.
There – fixed.
In addition to TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome), the folks at WEF clearly suffer from a severe, virulent form of DDS (Debby Downer’s Syndrome).
“…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.
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.
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.
“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.
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/
President Trump Paris Decision Increases the Threat of a Global Collapse of Climatist Ideology; Greenies In Full-Blown Panic Mode.
Film at 11.
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.
Berkley Earth already did that.
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.
Methinks it was supposed to be … Global Environmental Lobby Ecosystem Collapse
Much better
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”.
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.
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.”
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?