Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to Sydney Morning Herald, climate charity donations are surging, mostly coming from the children of wealthy families.
‘It’s really hard to wait’: Young, rich, and spending heavily to fight climate change
By Michael Koziol
June 27, 2021 — 12.00amA younger generation of philanthropists is driving a surge in donations to climate change charities, with the country’s biggest environmental advocacy groups almost doubling their revenue in a year.
Analysis by Groundswell Giving and the Australian Environmental Grantmakers Network found the top six environmental charities increased their revenue to $163.5 million in the 2020 financial year, from $93 million the previous year.
Most of this came from bequests and donations. For example, Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission records show donations to the World Wide Fund for Nature skyrocketed from $24 million in 2019 to $54 million last year.
…
Scions of Australia’s wealthiest families are increasingly ploughing their money into climate change prevention as they gain control of, and influence over, family trusts.
…
One of Australia’s most active young philanthropists is Clare Ainsworth Herschell, following in the footsteps of her father Geoff, the heir to pokies tycoon Len Ainsworth.
Ms Herschell says she had a real-life “come to Jesus” moment while watching the climate change documentary Chasing Ice, which followed nature photographer James Balog around the Arctic. “I was like, ‘oh my gosh, what have I been doing all this time?’.”
…
Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/national/it-s-really-hard-to-wait-young-rich-and-spending-heavily-to-fight-climate-change-20210624-p583za.html
The fear campaign targeting young people is obviously getting some traction with people who are too young to have personally experienced all the failed climate predictions. But its going to be interesting to see how long charities can maintain this level of interest, without delivering any value for all those donations.
As Willis pointed out recently, achieving Biden’s 2030 emissions reduction target would require commissioning a new 2.25GW nuclear reactor every week. There is no hope of achieving anything like this drop in emissions. People who are finding it “really hard to wait” are going to have their hopes dashed.
But perhaps climate charities don’t care if they break the hearts of their most eager supporters. It doesn’t matter if the current crop of gullible young donors become disillusioned with the utter lack of progress, because the climate nonsense taught in our schools ensures a steady supply of new impressionable young people, to replace those who wise up and stop giving.
What a racket and con job!
Clearly, too many suckers have been born.
As P.T. Barnum once said, “There’ a sucker born every minute”.
H. L. Mencken said; “No one in this world, so far as I know … has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.”
A fool and their money are soon parted. More so with young fools, I suspect.
Fools with daddy’s money? Yep, biggest fools around.
Not born but corrupted by designer-brain education to serve a political agenda. I like to think that I would have been one of the small percentage immune to the propaganda. I didn’t join groups, fraternities and the like. At graduation, an uncle said he wanted me join the Masons and how it gave you connections and help wherever you went. I said thanks, but no thanks that
I wanted to find my own way and successes and overcome failures using my own resources.
I laugh at the 97% of climate scientists in lock step on climate. They truly could easily be replaced by models which is what they have done to themselves. I actually think the 3% dissidents is about right. Probably pretty close to the percentage of dissidents in the Soviet Union, although the very brave major dissidents who stood up to Stalin – Soltzenitsen, Sakharov and others were a fraction of a percent but sowed the seeds that broke
Soviet Union down.
3: 97, I like the odds. Sceptics have never lost a single debate even though audiences are always more than somewhat on the side of mainstream before the debate. ‘Dissidents’ have taken consensus climate apart, because in a consensus there is no need for such a festival to have skill in thought, analysis argument, and razor-sharp logic. It is a self congratulatory easy peasy belief system.
Steve McIntyre had a post in which he discussed how mediocre the minds of the Team were. He said its hard to see Phil Jones as an Oxford Don of bygone years. He said Mann and other prominent consensus members of the ‘Team’ would have been lucky to have been highschool science teachers several generations earlier.
Okay, I didnt want to get into this, but scientifically literate sceptics and eclectic intelligent laymen are simply a lot smarter because they are self made and reflective. Both sides have the political animal type which I am not referring to here.
There are a few clearly smart scientifically and mathematically skilled adversaries that seem stuck on the wrong side, unaware of the shortcomings of those they support, although they simply stay away from discussing the most mindless offerings of the consensus (a certain fellow by the name of Nick comes to mind).
Well, comrade Stalin was the foremost mathematician of Soviet Union, best general, etc.
Climate charities.
The latest modern version of;
“onshore money laundering gates”
cheers
But we don’t need emissions reductions – not CO2 reductions. If anything, the world benefits by adding CO2.
They’re young and green. They’re buying indulgences for Green, not green, effect.
They all need CO2 therapy … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xcc5-ApXFm8
They are simply following the pattern of the old Roman Catholic Church, certainly as existed in Britain/England of old, seeking Papal indulgences for financial reward, yet not following the faith which is not meant for them, but the peasantry for it is they who must curtail their sinful wickedness of driving, flying, etc!!!
When I was young, but not rich, I spent all my cash on beer and women. I can guarantee I had a much better time than these young climate worriers. They need to stop listening to their indoctrinators, sorry, I meant teachers, and get themselves down the pub.
Cheers! Hic!
As the saying goes, I spent half my money on booze gambling and chasing women. The other half I just wasted.
I think that was George Best, the soccer player. When asked what had happened to all the millions that he’d earned, he said:
“Most of it went on loose women, fast cars, and booze. The rest I just squandered.”
One of my favourite quotes.
I think indoctrinators was correct, no apology needed.
I beg to differ. Many of these spoiled young people may be having fun as well, and then seeking atonement for their profligate lifestyles by purchasing climate indulgences from the crisis industrial complex. At least we knew better.
“I spent most of my money on beer and women; the rest I just wasted…” – unknown?
As the mighty Pub Landlord, Al Murray says about the Taliban – “get down the pub & get some real memories, after a few pints they’ll see sense & give it all up!!!”
Al Murray’s Pub Landord. My favourite line:
The only good thing about living in Ireland is it’s further away from France.
Fantastic! The more they waste, the less they can interfere.
In other words it’s not coming from people who have made their own money.
More money than brains.
Easy come, easy go. If they had spent thier own sweat and tears building up that wealth they may not throw it down the climate drain so easily.
Other people’s money comes and goes easily. See: SLO-Mo-Joe Byesin-Heiress. $T’s squandered
Greg, you’re assuming they are giving till it hurts ie. cramps their lifestyle. As the old saw goes, “it’s not how much you give, it’s how much you have left afterward.”
Not to mention that almost all the beneficiaries are tax exempt and give a nice deduction on income taxes.
An added benefit would be that they understand how wealth is created and not be so enamored by the socialist fantasies peddled by the
“education”indoctrination system.Yet further proof that it is a religious cult movement, not science based.
Apparently she never thought to go and find out whether glaciers are supposed to collapse into the sea and this is part of the natural water cycle. She did not bother to find out Arctic ice is NOT suffering run-away melting, she just took it on FAITH, because well, ecologists never lie do they. They are “good ” people.
Yes, a a religious (i.e. behavioral protocol including “ethical”) and cargo cult (e.g. intuitive, inductive) science. Let us bray to mortal gods and goddesses with em-pathetic appeal.
Think of the pups! Donate to World Walrus Founddation. A joint project of endangered walruses and seals.
Follow the pride parades in Africa where lions, lionesses, and their [unPlanned] cubs play in gay revelry but are threatened by social justice and progress policies in developing nations.
By culling poley bears, possibly?
How about they donate to the homeless? They are the REAL climate warriors; living in tents, no electricity, few showers. The Homeless are living “lighter on the planet” than any of these spoiled brats. They should give all of mommies salary to the homeless, and join them on the street. Who lives the REAL zero carbon lifestyle? The homeless do. Come on Buffy and Jupiter, climb out of moms Porsche SUV and live on the streets … with nothing. What? You weren’t quite THAT committed to the cause? You just wanted someone to make OTHER PEOPLE live in the dirt. Right. Got it.
Well, when the inheritance runs dry and they have zero marketable skills in the real world, they may have to find out what it’s like. I have no sympathy whatsoever.
Unfortunately the issue of “homelessness” is as complex as the issue of “Climate”.
A rational approach would be to address the causes of “homelessness”, which in many instances can be tied to severe mental illness.
Take one step back and question why so many mentally ill people are now on the streets (compared to when we were growing up), one (of many) reasons is that the government (at least in the US) cut back on funding of residential mental illness facilities. In NYS many residents of psychiatric facilities were turned out on the streets almost over night.
A broken arm, or CANCER – a popular finding favorite, were always prioritized by hospital administrations at the expense of mental illness programs when reduced government contributions shrunk to total size of the hospital funding pie.)
The reality is giving money directly to the “homeless” is perpetuating a symptom and not the actual issue. Money is better spent on mental health.
The homeless situation is part of a narrative to make it look like “capitalism has failed.” They don’t have significant homelessness in countries like Cuba, for obvious reasons.
The government subsidizes homelessness, which supports that narrative. In Los Angeles county in California an individual homeless person qualifies for up to $221 a month in “general relief,” and $234/month in CalFresh food stamps which can be used in fast food restaurants. For many people who are mentally ill, that beats working for a living.
I invite you to come to California and try to live on $455 per month.
It was the ACLU that eventuated the collapse in mental health housing.
Them and their trial lawyers found the stray low IQ non-mentally-deranged test cases and sued the mental health hospitals for keeping them “imprisoned”, and of course won, costing millions. It became too expensive for governments to maintain the facilities, so they shut them down.
Much as the SCOTUS created the right for the “homeless” to sleep on the streets.
Leftists again creating problems that now negatively effects us all.
ALL non-profits should be required to identify, in all advertising, the % of collected funds that go to 1) Fundraising, 2) Employees and 3) To “The Cause”. 4) To post a list of all employees and their annual total reimbursement including that of their legal team, whether contracted or directly employed.
Let people know WHO they are donating to.
Check out the Charity Navigator website. It has some of the information you want for participating non-profits.
And we are missing a truly “Golden Opportunity”.
Actually it is all the fault of ethical tradespersons and businessmen.
If we had rewarded the gullibility of these people and their parents,they would have neither the money or leisure to be minding our business so intensely.
These are the Gullible.
God put them on this earth to be gulled.
The Cult of Calamitous Climate is doing God’s work,shearing Gang Green.
Unfortunately,in light of The Dread Covid Theatre,I no longer know when the sarcasm tag applies.
Probably the same people who have been suckered into believing in socialism.
Well … we didn’t get solar panels quite right in the 1970’s
But … we will get Socialism right this time
Their parents evidently did not teach them that a fool and his money are soon parted.
From an earlier article about “de-carbonization,there is the quote, “In other words, they have no idea how it can be done, or whether it can be done, and nobody has even started working on the problem yet.”
Yeah, but the donors will get to feel good about themselves and get virtue points to keep them cool in summer and warm in winter after all the conventional energy sources go dark. Meanwhile, the charities will find some new grift to keep up their lifestyles.
What a perverse amount of free money given to hypocritical parasites. Sickening…the injustice.
Are these the same ones that put up rooftop solar made with slave labor?
Scions are like Hollywood stars; who have more wealth than they could possibly spend in a lifetime, and want to relieve their “Climate Extinction” anxiety without any actual change in their own life style.
The answer is to buy indulgences and prosthelytize from the comfort of their mansions.
Unfortunately, the young here in Australia have been brainwashed and simply can’t think critically. They really do believe money (Taxes) will fix the climate.
I guess they have nothin else to do during COVID-19 lockdowns.
I’d like to see a plot of Taxes Collected by year and GAST for the year, Patrick.
Here in Aus each tax year we do get a statement from the ATO showing where our taxes go, mostly welfare. It’s no where near granular and detailed enough and it is eye watering when you see the numbers. What we also don’t see is taxes that are frittered away on climate boondoggles.
I was just planting a thought seed, Patrick. We already know what that graph would look like.
It would be an amusing graph to share with the Climate Calamity acolytes, though.
“A younger generation of philanthropists is driving a surge in donations to climate change charities, with the country’s biggest environmental advocacy groups almost doubling their revenue in a year.”
***********
So this isn’t about the climate, is it?
Cabaret | “Money” Musical Number | Warner Bros. Entertainment – YouTube
“The corruption of science in the US is endemic to the way science is funded.”
The FDA is broken. It’s controversial approval of an ineffective new Alzheimer’s drug proves the agency puts profit over public health. (msn.com)
However you don’t want to get selective about that as Eisenhower warned us all.
.
.
So my question is, for all that money, how much did the planet cool off?
If it has cooled, nothing to do with green charities.
Exactly. But when will the rich kids figure that out? I’d say, ohhhh… never.
For all the money spent trying to stop global warming, we should be Snowball Earth by now.
(Thanks for playing the straight man, Eric 😜)
“It’s really hard to wait.”
To overcome the climate blues, start doing your own investigation of climate and you will discover you have been misinformed by consensus climate science, activists, channel news and your teachers (who have also been misinformed. They mean well.)
While your waiting, here is a tiny quiz you can handle using simple logic:
There is a sizable tree stump, still rooted, of white spruce that was radiocarbon dated at 5000 years old (Holocene Optimum) at Tuktyaktuk, an Inuit town on the Arctic coast a hundred km north of the present day treeline.
Question 1a): what does this say about the climate that this tree grew up in compared to that of the present day at this location? Use only logical thought to get the irrefutable answer.
Question 1b): Does this discovery falsify the often heard statement from today’s “consensus” climate scientists that today’s temperatures are the hottest in a million years?
Question 2a) the Holocene Optimum when this ancient tree grew had already existed at an estimated 2°C or
more than it is today for 2-3000yrs before this ancient spruce was a seedling. A study by Danish geologists of the presently ice-locked northern shore of Greenland revealed an ancient sandy beach with abundant driftwood including larch from Russia dated up to 7000+ years before the present. This beach could only have developed by wave action from a 100km or more of ice-free ocean facing the beach. What does this ‘say’ about present day worries concerning “tipping points” that will lead to permanent sea ice loss with another degree and a half of warming by 2100?
Question 2 b) what does the fact that polar bears survived 5-7000 yrs of much greater warmth say about the adaptability of this bear to wide swings in Arctic climatic conditions? Should we be worried about this creature’s ability to survive a degree or two of warming above above today’s temperatures?
Stay tuned for revelations from history that falsify the “consensus” narrative about an imminent climate crisis to doom the world and some interesting stuff on the benefits of a bit of warming and increased CO2 in the atmosphere.
A supplementary question, to which I’ve never had a straight answer from an alarmist: For most of Earth’s history,atmospheric CO2 concentrations were higher than today, often many times higher. Why has this never led to catastrophe in the past?
Only answer I’ve ever gotten to that has been, essentially, “this time it’s different”.
What in the world is a climate charity?
A criminal enterprise with semi-plausible deniability.
See also: US Republican Party
They are tax exempt where?
Well, I didn’t have to bite, but go on then I will. Do you have any data to support that? You’re batting about zero for five hundred when asked that question on “climate”, so why not have a batting average of 0.00000 on politics too.
Climate charity: n. A feel-good, virtue-signaling scam operation funded by those with significantly more money than brains who want to feel like they are “saving the planet”, and who want to assuage their “carbon guilt”, similar to indulgences (see Catholic Church).
One day, these people are going to realise dangerous man-made global warming is the greatest scientific deception ever perpetrated on mankind (although, I must say, the covid ‘scamdemic’ is not too far behind).
I’m not sure they will. Every generation has its big issue, I think climate will quietly fizzle in the face of Pandemic hype or maybe malevolent AI scare stories, looking ahead a few years. People seem to kind of suddenly move on, almost like the previous scare never happened at all.
With respect Mervyn, not even close. What about fake-socialism is really, really good for poor people genocidal concept? Hundreds of years ahead, and even “black lives matter” has over a hundred years of history, in its different forms from the “keep them subjugated” democratic party, in order to get the swing vote.
these kids have wealth guilt brought on by not eating enough Greens
How the hell did we sit back and let this Marxist crap take over our culture so completely?
“For tyranny to prevail, the good men/women simply have to do nothing”
Paraphrasing Edmund Burke/Thomas Jefferson
She’s a match for Griff
does she own her own pub?
(That used to be the gold standard when I was single)
Does it matter? You’d be a match made in heaven. Just kidding, but Ainsworth’s machines are in all pubs.
griff,
What kind of pub did you own then?
😝
There’s nothin’ so lonesome
Morbid or drear
Than to stand at the bar
Of a pub with no beer
Yes indeed.
🙂
I wonder what the chances are of getting a Charity registered called “Climate Realism”?
Probably about the same as there being a website called skepticalscience.com
…. the same as Luddites telling people they’re progressives and the stupid ones believing it.
…. the same as neo-Stalinists telling people they’re liberals and the stupid ones believing it. Need I go on.
Your problem Rod is that you didn’t inherit the “ability to lie big” genes. The Home Page for the Climate Realism Charity starts off with:
We’re all going to die from Arctic Ice melting. Send money.
A younger generation of philanthropists is driving a surge in donations to climate change charities, with the country’s biggest environmental advocacy groups almost doubling their revenue in a year.
How can an advocacy group be described as a charity?
Fools and their money. If only I had the grifter gene, I could retire in style by fleecing these fools.
Did anyone else read the headline acronym as “Shaking My Head”?
Time to strip them of their tax exempt status and tax these “charities” at 95%.
“Ms Herschell says she had a real-life “come to Jesus” moment while watching the climate change documentary Chasing Ice”
We need a new film genre. I’ll suggest “scare-u-mentary”
What do these “climate charities” actually do?
They allow the people who run them to have very large carbon footprints. Strange that, eh?
The process of buying climate indulgences will continue until the Reformation.
<em>”Young People Are Pouring Their Money into Climate Charities” </em>
Excellent I hope they impoverish themselves, their parents and get massively into debt.
The phools deserve it!
Education through experience can be a hard taskmaster.
Maslow again, they have too much money and too much time on their hands so they fill in their days “saving the planet”
“There’s a sucker born every minute”. Truer words have never been spoken.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth gets its pants on”. Attributed to Mark Twain. Whoever said it, he hit the nail on the head.