Guest fake American Indian bashing by David Middleton
WARNING
This post is extremely political. If you are offended by hardball politics, stop reading here. Comments to the effect that you don’t like political posts or are offended political incorrectness and moderately insensitive language will be mercilessly ridiculed.
Fauxcahontas is truly a “stupid and futile gesture”…
A climate denier-in-chief sits in the White House today. But not for long
The next president must rejoin the Paris agreement and show the world that the United States is ready to lead on the international stage again
President Trump has now fulfilled his disastrous promise to pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement. The agreement represents decades of work by both Democratic and Republican administrations to achieve a common goal: bringing every country of the world together to tackle the climate crisis, the existential threat of our time.
President Trump surprised no one with his decision to withdraw from the agreement. It is yet another reckless choice in line with his steps to rollback our bedrock environmental laws, which have cleaned up our water and our air for decades. But that doesn’t minimize the gravity of his latest move. Trump is not only ceding American leadership at a critical juncture in the fight against climate change, he’s also giving away American jobs in the clean energy economy of the future – walking away from the greatest economic opportunity of our time.
[…]
But instead of acting to protect American lives and creating good paying jobs, we have let Big Oil set our climate policy in Washington. These companies spent three decades deceiving the public about the climate crisis, spreading lies and misinformation through their lobbyists. With Donald Trump in the White House, they now have a climate denier in chief.
[…]
My Green Manufacturing Plan will jumpstart clean energy development right here in the United States by investing $2tn to grow clean energy at home and abroad, while creating millions of new, good paying, union jobs. And my Green Marshall Plan would directly assist countries abroad to buy American-made clean energy products, further expanding markets for green manufacturing.
[…]
The world is facing one of the biggest threats we have ever encountered. But Americans do not walk away from a fight. We lead. In November 2020, it won’t just be Donald Trump on the ballot but also the chance to renew America’s climate leadership for a safer, cleaner, more secure and more prosperous future.
The Grauniad
Notes to Liawatha
There are very few electoral votes in the UK
Writing an OpEd in the Grauniad is as dumb as Puto (Beto) campaigning in Mexico.
The Paris Agreement will have no affect on the weather
The energy industry isn’t a jobs program
Why do journalists, environmentalists and liberals (redundant, I know) confuse energy production with jobs programs? The only way an economy can successfully grow in a healthy, robust manner is through increasing productivity.
What is ‘Productivity’
Productivity is an economic measure of output per unit of input. Inputs include labor and capital, while output is typically measured in revenues and other gross domestic product (GDP) components such as business inventories. Productivity measures may be examined collectively (across the whole economy) or viewed industry by industry to examine trends in labor growth, wage levels and technological improvement.BREAKING DOWN ‘Productivity’
Investopedia
Productivity gains are vital to the economy, as they mean that more is being accomplished with less. Capital and labor are both scarce resources, so maximizing their impact is a core concern of modern business. Productivity enhancements come from technology advances, such as computers and the internet, supply chain and logistics improvements, and increased skill levels within the workforce.
That said, the oil & gas industry employs far more Americans than wind & solar power do:
The natural gas industry employs 625,369 Americans.
• Utilities employed 176,167.
• Mining and extraction employed 162,928.
• Construction employed 113,339.
The coal industry employs 197,418 Americans.
• Mining and extraction employed 55,905.
• Utilities employed 45,795.
• Wholesale trade employed 43,327.
The petroleum industry employs 799,531 Americans.
• Mining and extraction employs 308,681.
• Wholesale trade and distribution employs 170,945.
• Manufacturing employs 155,267.
The nuclear industry employs 72,146 Americans.
• Utilities employ 46,809.
• Professional services employ 14,374.
• Manufacturing employ 4,913.
2019 U.S. Energy and Employment Report
• Solar energy firms employed 242,000 employees who spent the majority of their time on solar.[3] An additional 93,000 employees spent less than half their time on solar-related work. The number of employees who spend the majority of their time on solar declined by 3.2 percent or more than 8,000 jobs in 2018.
• There were an additional 111,000 workers employed at wind energy firms across the nation in 2018, an increase of 3.5 percent or 3,700 jobs.
2019 U.S. Energy and Employment Report
The Energy and Employment Report lists “mining and extraction” for oil and gas as two separate groups. This doesn’t make sense because oil & gas are explored for, drilled and produced by the same people. The “mining and extraction” employees are probably redundant.
Regarding productivity, there is no comparison between “renewables” and real energy:
Energy production is from the 2019 BP Statistical Review of World Energy. I did not include the natural gas “mining and extraction” employees because I think they are also counted among petroleum employees. If I count them, oil & gas productivity drops to 1,583 TOE/job.
“In November 2020, it won’t just be Donald Trump on the ballot but also the chance to renew America’s climate leadership for a safer, cleaner, more secure and more prosperous future.”
Anyone with at least two functioning brain cells knows that a vote for your treasonous energy schemes would be a vote against “a safer, cleaner, more secure and more prosperous future.”
Some jobs created, some lost, some not interesting in counting or getting the productivity story anyway.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/first-solar-to-open-new-us-manufacturing-plant
I guess it’s always been this way. Low information groups argue loudly while technology, lowest cost output, and production moves ever forward and around the obstacles in some cases.
Article is from April of 2018.
Net income down 47% from 3rd qtr of last year. EPS guidance unchanged going forward. Stock fell 11% in October with the earnings announcement. Pop open the champagne.
Maybe you meant to link to this one about the plant being open…
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/first-solar-sees-profit-return-in-q3-2019
Or maybe you didn’t want to link to it because it notes (my caps), “…First Solar has faced challenges on various fronts in recent quarters, INCLUDING INCREASES IN OPERATING COSTS. Last month, it announced it was transitioning away from its internal engineering, procurement and construction model in the U.S. and will instead rely on partners to build projects, with about 100 jobs set to be cut as a result…”
“All manufacturers are benefiting from the ongoing U.S. solar boom, driven by continuing cost declines and burgeoning demand from projects racing to capture the value of the soon-to-decline federal Investment Tax Credit for solar modules.”
The decline in tax credit is set to begin the first of next year. That suggests any project planned has been scheduled to take advantage of the credits this year. First quarter results and forward guidance may prove very interesting.
This comment is on the disclaimer.
My problem with “political posts” is two-fold.
First, the information value of yet another post ranting about some politician we don’t like is as low as it goes. How much do you add to the conversation by repeating everything thats already been said?
For instance: Warren is disingenuous, she lied about her minority status, and her proposed policies are going to break the bank. There. I’ve just said everything that can be said, and I doubt you can say much more (not that it will stop you – it is the Silly Season after all).
Second: if she’s lying, the same can be said about every other candidate running for President at this time regardless of party affiliation. Focusing only on the lies of those we hate is in itself disingenuous.
So I consider a political rant here simply taking up space that could be devoted to actual facts and information on a vital topic of this generation. I have plenty of sources I can go to for partisan cheerleading. Not so many for in-depth discussions climate matters that contain heft and gravitas.
Who can find a pay phone these days?
Try at the bus station or train depot.
Joel
the last time I stumbled on a pay phone, there was a pile of rumpled clothes and a pair of glasses on the floor. It looked like whoever used it last left in a hurry.
Poor Clark Kent! Must be getting tough for him (and Super Man) nowadays.
The funniest (in a dark humor way) take on the Super-hero changing in the phonebooth archtype was a promo for one of the Deadpool movies. There’s a crime in progress, Deadpool goes into a phonebooth to change into his super-hero outfit and while he’s struggling to change in the cramped booth the crime victim is shot and killed.
I hate to admit that I am a YUGE Deadpool fan.
That used to be a dime!
And in some places it’s more than a quarter, if you can even find a pay phone to use.
Bill, you do realize nobody is forcing you to read the political post. David made it abundantly clear that the post would be political in nature from the outset. You could have simply not read the post and spent your time elsewhere. instead, here you are, ranting about the political nature of the post that you could have simply ignored. I’d tell you to take your concern trolling to people who care, but honestly nobody really cares about your concern trolling.
Bill P.
You left out her proposed “wealth tax”. The “rich” would have to pay a tax on there net worth.
(With “rich” being defined as those whose net worth is greater than her $10+ million net worth.)
“And my Green Marshall Plan would directly assist countries abroad to buy American-made clean energy products, further expanding markets for green manufacturing.”
I guess she has no understanding of why American goods do not sell in other countries and what their trade strategies are in contrast to our traditional non-strategy.
Good work, David, you revealed the bargain part of her plans. Her Green Marshall Plan only costs 2 trillion dollars, whereas her Medicare For Everyone costs 52 trillion dollars. I’m a little surprised it isn’t against the law to falsify your minority heritage to get a job that is at least partially federally funded. Maybe I should try it?
Remember … open borders. So the healthcare sector will need to expand to take care of 7bn patients.
I’m so tired of those on the left preaching climate doom and calling us science deniers. Reality is not on their side because those on the right are not actually ignoring science. Truthfully, we all have bias and we all look for things to confirm what we already believe. This is true for everyone, except that those on the left use their bias in an attempt to create shackles on everyone. Except themselves, of course. Time is running out on the AGW scare with every year which passes. They can scream the sky is falling for so long before they blend in to the background noise of irrelevancy. They can only fudge the data for so long before it becomes even more blatant than it already is. These people have cashed in all their credibility in an attempt for global deception. People like Michael Mann will be remembered in history as the buffoons and liars they really are. I honestly feel sorry for their descendants who have to look back at their distant family in such shame.
I read recently that China is increasing its exports of solar panels.
So it is using (relatively) cheap energy, generated by coal, to produce solar panels that produce expense energy.
This would appear to give Chinese industry an absolute advantage over foreign industry that produces its energy using solar panels, in much the same way that cheap foreign labor costs create an advantage over domestic high cost labor in the US. (Note that this only a single component in the economics of any industry).
Dave you do not get Liberals or politicians.
The problem is Warren is promising unicorns (an idea that will never work for engineering and economic reasons but sounds appealing to young people and gullible liberals) and promising to pay with for her fantasy idea, with unicorns.
The hydrogen economy is another unicorn idea. The liberals do not understand it takes energy to make hydrogen and hydrogen is expensive and difficult to store and transport.
Warren claims she is the only one who understands the climate change problem and what really needs to be done to solve it.
Liberals believe the stuff they make up and the fake news (say PBS or CNN) just repeat, the talking points.
Logic is not going to change Liberal minds. It has not so far.
There will need to be cooling, a severe economic recession, or a sudden large natural disaster to get liberals to question their paradigm.
I don’t have to “get” them to enjoy ridiculing them.
William wrote: “There will need to be cooling, a severe economic recession, or a sudden large natural disaster to get liberals to question their paradigm.”
Severe economic recession = depression. Does 8 years of muddling along with an Obamanomics chronic recession that should have last 18 months at most count?
Plus, I’d prefer the patient (that be us) not to die in order to reveal that the b’witch doctor was wrong in her Rx.
I agree Warren is a dangerous candidate appealing to the gullible, uniformed, and those who want more government money.
What if your only news source is CNN, PBS, and Saturday night live?
CAWG (which does not exist, we caused less than 5% of the recent rise in atmospheric CO2) is the idea that is helping sell the recycled ‘out of box solutions’ that are known unicorn ideas.
Warren claims she is only one that can think big enough to spend a gazillion dollars on stuff that does not work to fight climate change.
I do not remember past Democrat candidates who have gone all in promising to tax the rich …
…. Which will of course will cause the rich to move their fortunates outside of the US and to spend all that imaginary infinite tax money…
… on stuff people want such as the elimination of student debt for 42 million people, free or low cost childcare, and so on.
Signature Policy: Warren wants to address American inequality with a wealth tax, imposed annually on “ultra-millionaires,” to pay for benefits, including universal free or low-cost childcare, for “yacht-less Americans.” Fortunes greater than $50 million would be taxed at 2 percent. Billionaires would pay 3 percent. The proposal has greater than 60 percent support and would raise $2.75 trillion over 10 years.
William: The super wealth tax is 3 percent per year of fortunate, not income.
RS Coverage: Elizabeth Warren Wants to Wipe Out Student Debt for 42 Million Americans
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/2020-democrat-candidates-771735/
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/tax-the-rich-786673/
Signature Policy: Warren wants to address American inequality with a wealth tax, imposed annually on “ultra-millionaires,” to pay for benefits, including universal free or low-cost childcare, for “yacht-less Americans.”
Perhaps it would be instructive to look to history for what happened when yachts were taxed. When George H.W. Bush broke his read my lips pledge to pass the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, it imposed a 10 percent luxury tax on yachts, private airplanes and expensive automobiles – Sen. Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share of taxes. But what actually happened was a different story.
Back then, Congress told us that the luxury tax on boats, aircraft and jewelry would raise $31 million in revenue a year. Instead, the tax destroyed 330 jobs in jewelry manufacturing and 1,470 in the aircraft industry, in addition to the thousands destroyed in the yacht industry. Those job losses cost the government a total of $24.2 million in unemployment benefits and lost income tax revenues. The net effect of the luxury tax was a loss of $7.6 million in fiscal 1991, which means Congress’ projection was off by $38.6 million. The Joint Economic Committee concluded that the value of jobs lost in just the first six months of the luxury tax was $159.6 million.
Congress repealed the luxury tax in 1993 after realizing it was a job killer and raised little net revenue. Why did congressional dreams of greater revenues turn into a nightmare? Kennedy, Mitchell and their congressional colleagues simply assumed that the rich would act the same after the imposition of the luxury tax as they did before and that the only difference would be more money in the government’s coffers. Like most politicians then and now, they had what economists call a zero-elasticity vision of the world, a fancy way of saying they believed that people do not respond to price changes. People always respond to price changes. The only debatable issue is how much and over what period.
h/t to Walter E. Williams from whom most of the above text was borrowed.
As long as there is at least 41 U.S. Senators (not RINOs), its all B.S.
At least she has the courage to lie rather impassionately.
What she proposes is communism, plain and simple.
The state that runs the economy. What could possibly go wrong…
They’re not just wrong. They’re 180 degrees, bass ackwards, obtusely, blindly wrong.
Let’s see now: green energy, union jobs, not-Trump, and Marshall Plan
Who needs a human candidate when you can use an algorithm with a few key advocacy words instead for a simulated liberal President with a Plan.
(Just to be clear you can’t be a Democrat certified by the Party without invoking some new Marshall Pan for spending on something. Europeans and UN staff also sling those plans around but there is much competition for your “leveraged” tax dollars.)
What I don’t understand is the need for government to “redistribute” the wealth. They’ll only rake off 50% and become the new rich.
Why not pass a law that billionaires have to establish a lottery, raffle, drawing, or something to distribute 50% of their income each year directly to people poorer than them. Cut out the government entirely! For those who want to participate the IRS could forward a person’s income to the lottery, etc. and then a weighted number of tickets would be purchased. Zero income gets 100 tickets and millionaires get one ticket.
Wind and solar produce much less per job (1/4 to 1/23) but the energy produced is effectively useless for powering customer energy needs.
Not really comparable.
She is campaigning to become the federal government’s CEO. I want to know what her plan is for the federal government to pay back all of its debts. What is her plan for the USA to stop the huge annual trade deficits and instead replace them with huge trade surpluses. How does she expect us to compete with countries like China which have such low costs of labor? I want to know how she expects to improve the economy for working class Americans.
The constitution limits the powers of the federal government and all powers not given to the federal government are given to the states. The federal government does not have the power to provide or enforce a national health care system. Such would be totally unconstitutional. The states can provide a health care system but not the federal government.
I Wish we had a Trump clone in Australia. He could withdraw from Paris and save us the billions it is costing us to do what we are doing. Our energy costs are through the roof at least three times those of the US.
In order to not disparage the First People’s of the eventually named American continent , can we all agree to just call her Paleface
Elizabeth is a white woman who thinks she’s a Cherokee…
…let’s call her a Jeep.
“…let’s call her a Jeep.”
Slogan (?): “Beep, beep, I’m a Jeep.”
Left wing groups continually demonstrate their total lack of economics 101 understanding by pushing the line of creating better jobs producing RE.
Whilst their vision is for a world where all people work to produce “politically correct” energy, economics 101 insists that energy production must contain the fewest overheads including workers and it must be as cheap and reliable as possible. This is because it is the use of the energy that is important for the production of wealth. Economics 101 knows that all workers must be using the energy to produce goods and services at a competitive price and that any worker that moves from producing goods and services to producing energy constitutes a loss to overall loss to GDP.
What is very telling in the left wing propaganda push to sell RE as a job creation mechanism is that they never talk about creating any jobs that use their RE to produce goods and services. Obviously even they know that RE has no productive value, which makes their own agenda seem even more sinister.
Do they have to understand economics when it’s OPM (Other Peoples Money)?
In the short term, no. as they can successfully use OPM to get votes and attain office and power. Longer term, however, and failure to understand economics can result in running out of OPM. OP tend to want to hold on to as much of their M as they can, and will modify their actions in order to do so. Case in point the 1990 Luxury tax that G.H.W. Bush signed off on to break his read my lips pledge. It was supposed to bring in $31 million in revenue a year, instead it cost thousands of jobs and resulted in $7.6 million loss in just the first year alone (in other words instead of a +31 million it was a -38.6 million). It was such a dismal failure that it was quickly repealed just 3 years later.
Good Union Jobs …… translates to built in money laundering scheme where US tax subsidy dollars are funded to Unions who in turn donate a portion to Fauxcahantas campaign funds.
This is the same shists that Obama did with his so called Stimulus.
Poster child of Fed funds to unions: CA high-speed train to nowhere.
Billions in funding still flow to this white elephant; when completed, it’ll be a semi-high-speed train from Modesto to Bakersfield. Besides wondering how many want to take a train from Modesto to Bakersfield, diligent observers may have noticed CA has not even finished the eminent domaine process to complete the track right-of-way.
Other diligent observers may ask why CA spends money on trains as opposed to forest management. One presumes the metropolitan areas of San Francisco & Silicon Valley, Sacramento, LA, and San Diego are safe from blackouts, unlike other third-world areas.
The TV told me that if I pay money to the government the weather will be gooder.
That first graph by Lomborg is wrong. Pull out of Paris or stay in, the climate will disregard it completely and carry on as normal.
That’s basically what Lomborg’s graph shows.
It basically shows that Paris will have no effect, on the given that climate models are reliable. But they’re not.
Correct-a-mundo… Even if the models were 0.5% right, it’s a futile and stupid gesture.
Even if the models where 100% correct, it would be a futile and stupid gesture without China, India, and the developing world also implementing draconian cuts to their emissions (and, thusly their usage of reliable energy) rather than having license to continue increasing their emissions until some future date (that when it comes, they’ll ignore)
As I’ve always suspected, this just confirms it: She’s a bimbo.
Bimbo or not, she’s making $174,000 per year, which most likely is a heck of a lot more than you make.
Karl
It isn’t news that some bimbos make a lot of money. The important question is, “Is she ethical and smart?’
An old taunt to Mensans is, “If you are so smart, how come you’re not rich?” The Mensan reply is, “Because being smart I realize there are things in life that are more important than money.” I would never run a scam like the “Clinton Foundation.”
Making, as in earning? How does she earn that?
That’s the salary she’s paid as a Senator. Having a salary doesn’t require one to actually earn that salary. At least in the business world, if a salaried worker fails to earn their keep, they can be fired. In elected government, she doesn’t have to do anything except get people to vote for her.
Aha! So, Karl worships people who have lots of cash in their piggies, whether it is earned or unearned income. Money is power. Power is what Karl worships.
That says everything I need to know about Karl.
Churchill: “Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?”
Socialite: “My goodness, Mr. Churchill… Well, I suppose… we would have to discuss terms, of course… ”
Churchill: “Would you sleep with me for five pounds?”
Socialite: “Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!”
Churchill: “Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price”
Can’t finish article. Still on floor laughing at “Liawatha”!
Middleton pollutes a decent blog that deals with climate with this crap.
Don’t like it then start your own blog. We are all guests here.
Warren, Steyer and the environmental justice warriors don’t draw a crowd in SC. https://twitter.com/sahilkapur
“Why do journalists, environmentalists and liberals (redundant, I know) confuse energy production with jobs programs? The only way an economy can successfully grow in a healthy, robust manner is through increasing productivity.”
Because in modern Progressivism, the real work is always up to someone else to sacrifice, do and pay for.
Try this little social experiment: The next time you’re conversing with one of these green activists, ask if they see themselves as being employed in manufacturing or installing solar panels, windmills, or insulation at any time in their future.
I’m willing to bet that 99% of the responses you get will be “No”.