Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to Oregon State social science professors, we need harsh carbon taxes to force a global convergence of per-capita carbon emissions. Most of the sacrifices will have to be made by rich nations.
Socially just population policies can mitigate climate change and advance global equity
by Oregon State University
APRIL 28, 2021Socially just policies aimed at limiting the Earth’s human population hold tremendous potential for advancing equity while simultaneously helping to mitigate the effects of climate change, Oregon State University researchers say.
…
“There are strong links between high rates of population growth and ecosystem impacts in developing countries connected to water and food security,” he said. “Given the challenges of food and water security, effective population policies can support achieving both social justice and climate adaptation, particularly when you consider the current and projected uneven geographical distribution of the impacts of climate change. Policies that address health and education can greatly reduce fertility rates.”
…
“Three examples of countries in which improved education for girls and young women may have contributed to significant fertility rate declines are Ethiopia, Indonesia and Kenya,” Ripple says. “Among those nations, specific education reforms included instituting classes in local languages, increasing budgets for education and removing fees for attending school. Ethiopia also implemented a school lunch program, large-scale school construction took place in Indonesia, and primary school was lengthened by one year in Kenya.”
…
“From both climate and social justice perspectives, affluent overconsumption by the wealthy must be addressed immediately, for example through policies like eco-taxes such as carbon pricing,” Ripple added. “Reducing fertility rates alone is clearly not enough. The middle class and rich must be responsible for most of the needed reduction in emissions.”
Taking steps to stabilize and then gradually reduce total human numbers within a socially just framework enhances human rights and reduces the further ordeals of migration, displacement and conflict expected in this century, Wolf and Ripple say. One potential framework is contraction and convergence, which calls for simultaneously reducing net emissions (contraction) while equalizing per capita emissions (convergence). This is equitable in the sense that it entails equalizing per capita emissions globally, a stark contrast to current patterns.
…
Read more: https://phys.org/news/2021-04-socially-population-policies-mitigate-climate.html
What a miserable vision for the future. Even the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin never attempted to create an economy this tightly controlled. And of course, just as in Soviet times, the elite would need special dispensation for extra emissions, so they could fly around, attend their conferences, and perform their good works.
Frankly I’d rather keep my freedom, and take my chances with a few climate driven superstorms, in the the unlikely event any noticeable deterioration of the world’s weather actually happens, than endure the authoritarian nightmare Oregon State University apparently wants to inflict on the world.
Update (EW): Changed “the rich” to “rich nations” in the first paragraph, for better clarity.
This comes as no surprise, this is the same state where they are allowing Portland to be destroyed by Antifa and BLM! Portland used to be a really nice place and Oregon is generally a lovely state but I won’t be going back for a visit anytime soon, unless they stop allowing rioting for the sake for social justice!
The Mayor of Portland is finally seeing the light and realizing that allowing criminals to run wild is not a good idea.
He has started speaking out against the anarchists and now he is getting death threats from at least one Antifa thug. The Antifa thug must be a real tough guy, he made a video threat with his face covered.
Here’s how to solve your problem mayor: Lock the troublemakers up and keep them locked up. That way they can’t get out and burn down your city. It’s pretty simple. Punish those who need it and the rest will take the lesson.
And don’t feed them either!
I openly continue to wonder, when AntiFa or any other autonomous militia sets up shop, takes over a section of downtown, and calls itself an equally autonomous nation … why provide power, food, water, cell-phone service, The Internet, or any deliveries or banking service?
Blockades work 2 ways. Stuff getting in, stuff getting out.
I don’t think 1 month would pass before the weak-hearted humanitarians on this side would be crying their eyes out against the ‘inhumane suffering’ caused by the strong guards ensuring the blockades hold. Let’m drink their own urine.
Once the idiocy falls, then closely identify all the players, and impose a 10 year tax upon them collectively for the damage and destruction their political tantrum exacted on the once working community they co-opted.
Tax to include rebuilding, restocking, lost wages, construction, etc.
I would say to make them and their progeny pay, but the Constitution forbids that. But, maybe since they are an autonomous zone the Constitution is void there. Also, most of them are probably incels so there won’t be any progeny.
Isn’t this the political side who is advocation “reparations”?
How does THAT pass Constitutional muster?
I think I have solved the problem of reparations. You will recall that Elizabeth Warren claimed to be part native American, and profited from it. When it was proved she was not, she said that the story of her ancestry was her family’s lore, and she had no reason to doubt it.
So I have decided that my family lore says that I qualify for reparations, whatever that may be. The government is welcome to do a DNA test on me – along with everyone else getting reparations – if they wish.
I’m sure if you think hard enough, you will remember being told similar things about your ancestry….
It’s doubtful whether any of them have ever held a steady job, so asking for reparations is a waste of time. Maybe the government could take half of their welfare or other government handouts? Or more!
Just feed them non-carbon food. That will kill two birds with one stone.
Or bivouac those who came in from out of state to take part in the festivities!
Work to make their own food. Work is good for the soul. A hoe handle will teach you humility!
“You cannot take any people, of any color, and exempt them from the requirements of civilization — including work, behavioral standards, personal responsibility and all the other basic things that the clever intelligentsia disdain — without ruinous consequences to them and to society at large” – T. Sowell
Only the rich will afford to do those “sacrifices”. Own solar panels, electric cars etc. partly financed by the taxpayers. The poorer the harder hit by this “madness of crowds”/”group think”/”secular religion”, hysteria. This is a process that needs to take much longer that the goals set up today. Only the availability of fossil fuels sets the time frame.
This ‘make the rich sacrifice’ meme is just their way to present climate science as a social issue so that fake emotional arguments leveraging fear and ignorance will work to overcome science that unambiguously shows how wrong the IPCC is about the size of the influence incremental CO2 will have.
Oregon has already been hard-hit by the destruction of most of the timber industry in the western part of the state. Poverty is a real issue there. None of this will end well.
But those unemployed forestry workers are mostly white- so it’s not a problem for the politically correct “social scientists”.
Maybe they can learn to code.
And maybe they can’t! Not everyone has what it takes to code. Most social scientists I have known probably would find it challenging.
I would say that ALL fake scientist’s would be unable to code.
There is quite a market for paid protesters.
Yes, Pamela. And that destruction was masterminded by quack “ecologists” at OSU, including the now geriatric fraud who wrote this latest “manifesto”. A solid gold idiot who knows zero zip about ecology and less than that about economics. Now he’s channeling Ehrlich and jonesing about mass murder. The absolute dregs. These 60’s commie wackadoodles should be committed to NY nursing homes where they can cough and spit on each other. Oh, and his pension revoked, too.
A small clarification, Mr. Worrall. I know these morons. They are not social scientists. They are “ecologists”. Not that any remarks in this thread about social scientists are wrong, but these jackanapes are otherwise self-branded.
“William Ripple and Christopher Wolf of the OSU College of Forestry …”
OSU is doing everything it can to keep up with UO, continuing to whore out its forestry department.
Here’s a dot to connect. Bill Ripple is the author of the Climate Emergency Petition published in BioScience last year. See here and here.
It’s a tiny dot. He’s a joke.
But now Oregon dominates the thriving “wokeness” industry! No need for real jobs.
“Most of the sacrifices will have to be made by the rich.” Besides being the usual ignorant socialist pap, what earthly evidence do these fools have that “the rich” ever sacrifice anything? They truly rich get mansions, private jets, limos, luxury restaurants, armed security, and everything else they desire. Their suck-ups, whether in corporatist “C” suites, government, and universities do well too. Sacrifices are ALWAYS for the serfs.
Yes, just about all the “sacrificses” end up being made by the poor and middle class. The rich, including corporations, have ways of passing their costs onto others, and the others are always lower on the food-chain than they are. That’s you and me.
Socialism is a destructive force for an economy. Free markets and choice, which means freedom from government overreach, are a boon to a free economy.
“Most of the sacrifices will have to be made by the rich.” Maybe we can start by closing this university.
I’ll start by sending them a copy of this particular paper next time they ask for money; along with a note: “In the long (long) run, OSU is obviously socially unjust and unsustainable; catering to the wealthy and providing one-ply toilet paper to everyone but the elites in the administration building.”
Not that I give them any more money anyway.
The year I graduated they implemented a diploma fee. $15. After five years of tuition and fees … they wanted another f’ing $15 to balance the costs. I sold my ceremony tickets and never looked back … until …
6 years later I caved and asked them if they still had the diploma laying around … they did, and they didn’t charge for them anymore. So I saved the $15.
A recent report form one of the think tanks has revealed that DEMOCRATS are the largest part of the 1%’ers! All this time we were told that it wa Republicans who owned all the big corporations! Who knew?
Just yesterday Joe said “It’s only right that the rich pay more.”
OK, I’ll bite: Why is it “right”?
And apparently his handlers did not remind Joe we already have a progressive tax system and almost half of our citizens pay no Federal tax at all.
Ah yes the old social justice for die hard lefties … well leftards you will have to win that justice at the end of barrel.
This is a tax the UN could collect. Then they would never need to beg for funding from elected leaders.
China has about 7 years of known oil reserves and about 30 years of known coal reserves. Both on the basis that they do not increase from where they are now. I foresee steep price rises for fossil fuels this decade.
Another bit of news is that China has reached peak population. Every chance India will become the most populated country within three years (without big losses from Covid of course).
Back when I was a lad, what these idiots are teaching was called ‘Social Studies’. But science envy took over…
They discovered that people listen to ‘scientists’ but ignore ‘socialists’ – now they have their audience. I wish I was joking at this point.
No, we instead need special taxes on social scientists.
I’ve stopped giving to any university including the one I went to. I only support the local charities I know are spending my money wisely. Boys and Girls clubs, Salvation Army, Samaritan’s Purse are a few that have very low overhead and really make a difference. Our local B&G club does more in helping disadvantaged kids than any government or school program I know of ever will and at a fraction of the cost per kid.
From the Aussie Salvation Army website:
Based on the principle: ‘From the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked’ (Luke 12:48), The Salvation Army believes that those nations which have both benefited from two centuries of industrialisation and have most contributed to such emissions ought to set the example in implementing policies and practices which reduce such emissions. We advocate improvements such as the efficiency of energy generation, development of non-fossil fuel sources of energy, and sequestering carbon that would otherwise enter the atmosphere. 6
You won’t see that on the Salvation Army website in Raleigh, North Carolina. All politics is local.
Perhaps – but that seems a little too accommodating for my taste. I’m sure they do lots of good works, but I wish they would think through the implications of some of the things on their website.
“I wish they would think through the implications”
A sadly missing trait among a vast number of people and organizations.
Chinese per capita is now about the same as the EU.
China mines and burns more coal than the rest of the world put together.
China is building coal fired generating plants like crazy – at home and around the world.
What is Orgeon advocating that China should do?
And answer came there none. The only thing they want is for the US to reduce its emissions, but its impossible to argue that this will have any material effect on the amount of global emissions, so they immediately pivot to arguing that justice requires per capital reductions. Which, as the EU example shows, has become an unsustainable argument.
Sometimes on forums such as Ars you find people desperately arguing, confronted with these inconvenient facts, that historical emissions are what we should take into account. It is only fair, on this argument, that China and India should emit enough to destroy civilization on earth.
The Green movement simply ties itself into knots when confronted with the fact that the real emitters are not the West. They want to argue that net reductions are the important thing, its just physics.
Then when confronted with the numbers on the tonnage, they move to arguing for per capita emissions. Completely illogical, but also given the rising per capita emissions of China, not a sustainable argument.
So then they move to historical emissions, those who have emitted more in the past should stop now, and the rest should carry on until they have caught up, in the name of justice. Which amounts to the argument that total tonnage is not what matters. In defiance of the supposed physics.
Its bad faith or hysteria, so egregious that it really doesn’t matter which.
Eric, I have a MSc in Geology from Oregon State University. This latest is a part of a continuing descent into woke nonsense. If they think I’m going to stop eating beans they are in for a surprise. Wait for it.
Its an absolute tragedy. I was speaking to a tenured scientist a few months ago, he was seriously wondering if his kids should even go to university, the whole thing is so toxic.
Pretty sure the answer is, “no”. I used to think you were ok if you were in a hard science area, but that ship has sailed.
Get them onto a serious apprenticeship scheme, and if they find a need for extra academic study then do it via day release.
A additional advantage is that you don’t get a massive debt from university fees.
A niece is doing this at Hinckley Point C nuclear power station.
I have a PhD in Physical Chemistry from the University of Oregon. Sadly, the UofO chemistry department pivoted from real scientific pursuits to virtue signalling “green” chemistry more than a decade ago. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against making improvements that reduce waste, toxicity, etc., but this was largely done because that was where the money was to be found. Smart funding move and if the “hard” science is no longer being done at the UofO will anyone notice? Now it looks like OSU (which I used to admire for being more focused on the applied sciences) has upped its wokeness game and joined the UofO in the great mindless spiral downward…
off topic, sorry, but:
Is There a Climate Crisis? The Science Says Not Now and Not in the Future | William Happer
If there’s one thing the world doesn’t need it’s lectures by social science professors. I think their Marxist postmodern ideology has unleashed an evil upon the western world that will take many years to extirpate.
I hope he’s leading by example and neutered himself.
What does he do with all his money? $136,660 (€112,672) average for that University. This salary is unheard of in most countries. You are the rich you unaware moron!
These people are the scum of the earth.
“force a global convergence of per-capita carbon emissions”
I think what they really mean is a global convergence of per-capita wealth.
Yep. But what they want is even worse.
Well, I sure hope Ale Gore and John Kerry lower their carbon emissions to equal that of 3rd world citizens. And soon too – due to the “emergency”. Of course, they’ll say they mean the nations- not individuals- getting themselves off the hook.
Kerry is well on his way to cracking 2 million airmiles on the Secretary of State jet, so I’m guessing no.
I naively thought fascism died with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. It seems to have, like a 1980s horror movie psychopath, survived the blows, crawled away and gathered strength in western universities.
When the wall fell, we only thought about Western capitalism triumphing, bringing prosperity to the East. We never thought about the consequences of elements of their culture flooding into the West.
Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, got heavily involved in United Nations climate politics and environmentalism after he lost his old job. Maybe we are seeing the consequences.
It’s all home-grown, Eric.
Every population has a large fraction of innate collectivists. Possibly a majority fraction. Fascism/communism draws them like
flies to s… bees to honey.There is no idea so absurd that some philosopher has not considered it.
Cicero
The modern version is that there’s no idea so idiotic that academic intellectuals will not embrace it.
America produces the most GDP per CO2, or any other measure you care to name.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/271748/the-largest-emitters-of-co2-in-the-world/
Want a cleaner world? Let America make everything and sell it on.
If they believe convergence is the solution, then surely they are leading by example in all facets of life?
Calculating the average global income to any reliability is very difficult if not impossible. This article documents one attempt and they arrive at $18,000/year, including an adjustment for purchasing power as it is simply cheaper to live in some countries.
Glass door estimates the average salary of a professor at Oregon state to be roughly $137,000/year.
So it would follow then that the learned professors should be donating or otherwise re-directing across the globe more than 85% of their salaries.
But we should not stop there. Surely given the accrued benefits of earning a higher than world average salary over their career, and even the generational advantages of their parents and grandparents careers, there is a duty to retroactively compensate at an even higher rate.
Lead by example, OSU. Show us the way with a noble experiment. Signatories to this document can demonstrate by making sure not to have more than 1 or 2 children, by using only “renewable” energy and using renewable resources. Sorry, no cars or plane travel. Trains might be okay if they use electric propulsion sourced completely from wind, solar, or hydroelectric. Bikes might be fine if they are made from bamboo or another renewable, non-carbon-emitting resource. No concrete or asphalt either. Definitely no plastic. It’s made from fossil fuels. Steel and wood might be okay if the energy comes from renewable resources and the trees are replaced. Also no central heating or air conditioning unless powered by renewable energy. Oh, and you’ll have to forego luxuries, wealth, and the accumulation of things created by fossil-fuel-powered industry. We will watch your noble experiment with breathless anticipation of a utopian future. Let us know how it turns out.
“Most of the sacrifices will have to be made by rich nations.”
The first sacrifice should be an elimination of social science departments.
I’m all in favor of equalizing per capita emissions. More fossil fuel driven power plants in developing countries will achieve that result in time. Since CO2 emissions will also enhance the biosphere, it turns out to be win win for humanity.
The additional CO2 will provide a little more energy to enhance the water cycle and back fill the solar energy used up by the enhancement of the biosphere. It doesn’t produce warming.
What does produce warming? It shows up clearly in this link:
Look at where the most warming shows up. It is downstream from where human pollution of the oceans is the highest. Two of the most evident originate off the coasts of China/Korea/Japan and off the East Coast of the US. The oceans are producing the warming and the cause is two-fold:
1) Natural salinity increases over the last 400 years.
2) Human pollution, both saline and plastic being the main culprits.
How do these produce warming? They reduce evaporation which is a natural cooling process. This allows solar energy to remain in the oceans longer which naturally leads to warming. Micro-plastics will also cause high energy solar photons to be absorbed sooner.
Humanity is ignoring our real impact on the climate while tilting at the CO2 windmill.
Which of course explains the two warming patches east of NZ and South America.. NOT !!
Fred, I wouldn’t expect there to be zero areas of naturally warmed waters. Certainly El Nino events will produce warmer water as well.
The area off South America is downstream from the outflow of the Parana River and all the beaches of Brazil and Argentina. It actually does fit the pattern.
Notice the coolest anomalies are where ocean upwelling occurs (and hence low pollution) or near Antarctica where pollution is also very low.
Eugenics again raises its ugly head. Get rid of the surplus population. They serve no useful function, increase consumption and pollution.
Yes, just wait. Last call (for your emissions). Sorry, we are going to have to cut you off.
Logan’s Run here we come.
“Taking steps to stabilize and then gradually reduce total human numbers “
Here we go again, Malthusian hypocrites masqueraded as climate prophets, promoting planetary impoverishment, the exact opposite to what should be done if this subject needed to be addressed.
Actually “population number” not even a problem, since we observe an almost constantly diminishing population growth rate since the 70s which could lead, in an as usual scenario, to a maximum around the 2070s, before starting decreasing.
I seem to recall Jordan Peterson saying that whenever somebody tells him we need to reduce the world’s population, he asks “Who do you think we should kill first?”
“Socially just policies aimed at limiting the Earth’s human population hold tremendous potential for advancing equity while simultaneously helping to mitigate the effects of climate change, Oregon State University researchers say”
Regardless of what you think about this essay, the sheer number of SJW buzzwords in the opening sentence are quite impressive. Got all the check boxes covered on this one.
From the posting:
“Reducing fertility rates alone is clearly not enough. The middle class and rich must be responsible for most of the needed reduction in emissions.”
*********
Oh the irony, the irony….
https://blogs.commons.georgetown.edu/engl-246-fall2011/2011/12/19/sex-law-and-power-in-orwell%e2%80%99s-nineteen-eighty-four/
Sex, Law and Power in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four
“In the world of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four sexual regulation is an integral part of the government’s ability to control the population of Oceania. Orwell presents a critique of the sexual regulation imposed on the subjects of Oceania in his presentation of a dystopian society and makes an argument for sexual privacy. West argues that there are two standard ways of establishing laws regulating sexual behavior.”
****
Academia and activists continue linking presumed social ills to the climate alarmist narrative. And as they continue taking their cues from George Orwell, his work becomes a convenient instruction manual rather of a fictional novel.
LOVE BIG BROTHER.
Oregon State social science professors
=========
Is this like math science, physics science, chemistry science, biology science, political science?
How can you tell the one that is not a science? They need to add ‘science” to the name.
Just like you can be sure the “Peoples Democratic Republic” is not democratic.
The rebranding of “the arts” is all that social science is. It’s an attempted coup for all intents and purposes, to make themselves the masters and finally relevant beyond being areas of study that charge larges sums for little useful return.
Your post is bang on. Logic, math have no need nor place in their world, it just muddies the waters with annoying facts.
You can be sure these professors have a per capita income far in excess of 98% of the world’s population. This income relies on many other people who are in turn polluting the planet.
So if the professors were to take no salary, many other people would be able to get by with less and thereby cut pollution in Oregon.
People in rich nations work hard for their way of life and their advancement has not been handed to them yet they are expected to sacrifice for others who do not sacrifice.
A lot of the liberal flag words were jammed into the article but most astounding was educating girls caused sterility.
This tax may well prove to be the biggest, legalized fraud scheme in history.
I would be happy to be taxed a modest amount to promote adapting to climate changes and weather conditions but not to a loony scheme to engineer an ideal climate for each of the five climate zones with 20 subzones (Köppen Classification).
Woke-ism is limitless stupidity, deceit and tyranny.
Every time one thinks it may have peaked, or plateaued, a new level of maniacal appears.
“And the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw”
“Taking steps to stabilize and then gradually reduce total human numbers”
They don’t love the planet, they hate people.
The per capita argument is always absurd. Ostensibly large countries such as Canada, the U.S., Russia, Australia will always have higher per capita outputs of emissions, simply because they are large, relatively sparsely populated and tend to be climatically challenged (in the real sense) by extremes of cold or heat. The outcome of normalizing emissions in those locations as compared to some countries at other ends of the extreme (high population densities and not surprisingly narrow temperature ranges) would result in death in those nations of numbers far exceeding worst case scenarios as IPCC puts forth. Go with solar and wind only in Russia and Canada and you’ll kill off a very measurable proportion of the population within a six month span. Low solar angle (and relatively abundant snowfall during those same months blocking the panels) and sub-8 hour daylengths in winter combined with below freezing temperatures is not a recipe for survival. So if the good professor is looking for a recipe to invoke widespread death in developed nations, well, he just may have found it. BTW, those migrants we’re so concerned about won’t fare any better when they arrive to take the place of the evil European descendants that have perished.
Idiocy.
Rich nations?
By 2027, we estimate that 1.2 Billion Chinese will be in the middle class, making up one quarter of the world total. China already makes up the largest middle class consumption market segment in the world and is a priority market for major multinational firms.
The Indian middle class constitutes 300–350 million of the population. There is significant income inequality within India, as it is simultaneously home to the some of the world’s richest people.
And from the Guardian 13/12/2018:
China called on rich countries to “pay their debts” on climate change at global talks on Thursday, criticising developed countries for not doing enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide finance to help poor countries do the same.
Per capita metrics are idiotic because it is the CAPITA that is the issue. Why should countries like Canada (which as a country is actually carbon neutral due to its large green areas) have to pay for the policies of countries like China and India?
According to the Census Bureau, the population of the United States increased by 7.4% between 2010 and 2020, which is the slowest rate of increase over a decade since between 1930 and 1940 (Great Depression). Most of the observed increase is due to immigration, since the fertility rate (1.71 births per woman) is also at a record low, below “replacement level”.
We don’t need the genius central-planners at Oregon State to “control” population growth–the United States seems to be doing it naturally without their help.
The United States also reduced its total CO2 emissions between 2010 and 2020 (despite the population increase), while China’s emissions more than doubled over the same period.
Back in the 1970’s, the Club of Rome was predicting that over-population would lead to mass starvation by 2000. Did their spiritual heirs at Oregon State ever stop to think that increasing CO2 concentrations lead to better harvests, which enable the Earth to better feed a growing population?
“Did their spiritual heirs at Oregon State ever stop to think”
I find that unlikely.
Okay, back date the bills for all the concrete with carbon emissions used in the Bonneville Power System and all the cheap power they got from this as reparations to the rest of us.
Start with a false premise and you can justify anything.
Unfortunately that’s how the Left has convinced our youth to accept a wide range of “solutions” to social issues (in addition to the “Climate Emergency”).
Youngsters today have lost the ability to “keep their eye on the pea”.
Most (if not all) GCMs assume constant relative humidity to determine WV. This is wrong but even if it was done correctly using the increase in saturation vapor pressure with temperature of the liquid water, the actual measured WV is about 43% more. This fact demonstrates that the GCMs are faulty and basing anything on them is profoundly wrong; perhaps evil. Comparison of assumed with measured WV is shown in this graph.
You guys first:
Propose that all tuition to government supported universities, colleges, and prep schools be waived and turition and fees received from students over the last 20 years be returned. State supported colleges, schools, and universities be taxed at 2x the highest individual rate, and professors, staff be paid $15 an hour. School sports programs to be separated from the academic institution and taxed as is any entertainment industry. Media studies, communications, and journalism schools be sold to the highest bidder (just to save time). Music and arts programs to be detatched from the schools and funded by private donations, only, at normal business rates. All college and university intellectual property be released patent copyright and trademark free and published at the school’s expense. All student loan interest and fee profit to be taxed at 100%. with interest applied at 6% per year.
Completion of extant government contracts and grant studies to be completed, gratis and all fees returned with interest.
Student and work visas for all university foreign and non citizen attendees, employees, staff, and professors at any schools not in compliance to be suspended retroactively.
All teaching positions must be able to pass a timed, comprehensive AP U.S. civics and government exam, in English, as might be typically found in 1980 in a standard suburban high school with a minimun score of 80%.
First question an honest journalist would ask: Professor, when will you reduce your own carbon foorprint to match the world mean?
Humm, no solar panels and lots of grass to mow.
Oregon State researchers are making a compelling argument for John Kerry to get rid of his private yachts and jet aircraft. But I seriously doubt mandated carbon pricing will be restricted to just “the wealthy”. That was the same story told in 1913 when democrats campaigning for income taxes said they would only apply to “the wealthy” too. So much for that fantasy. These people just want more tax revenue because they realize they can’t borrow against the future anymore. Think of it this way, the US government owes 28.2 trillion but only has tax revenue of 3.4 trillion. That’s bad. The good news is there is 161 trillion in assets, so plenty left for new taxes to take. Usually, new taxes are a very difficult thing to do. But not when you are scaring everyone into allowing their assets to be taken by claiming to be saving the planet.
The per capita method of C)2 accounting makes Australia a bigger emitter than China
Absolute tosh
If CO2 causes global warming then it is the PPM in the atmosphere, not how much each individual releases that counts?
And what about historical emissions?
These people are cuckoo. Thinking/believing they can control GDP with social justice edicts is nuts.
This teachable Moment:
“Frankly I’d rather keep my freedom…”
The only thing you’ll be keeping is your EV providing you’re not middle class or rich as no reversion will be tolerated-
1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, new research shows (msn.com)
“Update (EW): Changed “the rich” to “rich nations” in the first paragraph, for better clarity.”
Not sure I believe this given that rich people are behind the green movement and want to stick the middle class with the bulk of the bill to ‘fix’ the climate.