The Looking Glass World Of “Climate Injustice” — Part II

Reposted from the MANHATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

This is Part II of what will now be a series titled “The Looking Glass World Of ‘Climate Injustice.’” The original post in what is now this series appeared way back on April 11, 2014. The thesis was that while climate campaigners prattle on about very minor supposed differential impacts of “climate change’“ upon the poor, at the same time the same campaigners demand schemes to intentionally devastate the economic situation of the poor by decreasing the availability and increasing the price of energy. The particular focus of the April 2014 post was policies advocated by the U.N., although the reasoning would apply equally to all national and international schemes to reduce carbon emissions. Excerpt:

Given the serious hardship faced by the world’s poor in the absence of energy access, one would think that a top priority of the U.N. would be finding ways to achieve that access as quickly, as cheaply, and as reliably as possible. But in fact, under the banner of so-called “climate justice,” the U.N. is doing exactly the opposite. It is doing its best to hobble, hinder and obstruct development of the cheapest and most reliable sources of energy in the third world, . . .

Fast forward seven years to today, and we now have the Biden administration going all in on the embrace of what they call “environmental justice” as the prime motivation behind trillions of proposed dollars of spending to transform the nation’s energy economy. It all kicked off with Biden’s January 27, 2021 Executive Order, commanding that all government agencies adopt a new focus on this “environmental justice” thing. Excerpt:

To secure an equitable economic future, the United States must ensure that environmental and economic justice are key considerations in how we govern. That means investing and building a clean energy economy . . . . Agencies shall make achieving environmental justice part of their missions by developing programs, policies, and activities to address the disproportionately high and adverse human health, environmental, climate-related and other cumulative impacts on disadvantaged communities, as well as the accompanying economic challenges of such impacts . . . .

Following the President’s directive, the EPA is just out with a big new Report titled “Climate Change and Social Vulnerability in the United States.” Take a look at the Report, and you will see these geniuses struggling to articulate exactly how climate change is supposedly going to differentially impact the poor or minorities in any way that anybody (including themselves) can even notice. Here are a few choice quotes from the Executive Summary:

  • “Those with low income or no high school diploma are approximately 25% more likely than non-low income individuals and those with a high school diploma to currently live in areas with the highest projected losses of labor hours due to increases in high-temperature days with 2°C of global warming.” Hang on — even assuming that “high temperature days” are increasing (they are not) does anyone actually lose “labor hours” due to high temperature days? As far as I know, the economy of places like Texas and Arizona, with summers above 100 deg F for weeks on end, continue to function without notable interruption.
  • “With higher levels of global warming and sea level rise, the risks to socially vulnerable groups are generally projected to remain approximately the same or increase.” Scary!
  • “Minorities are 41% more likely than non-minorities to currently live in areas with the highest projected increases in traffic delays from high-tide flooding associated with 50 cm of global sea level rise.” So exactly how many people in a given year experience “traffic delays” due to “high tide flooding”? They don’t say, but a good answer would be “almost none.”

Against these completely speculative and almost negligible harms to small numbers of people, we have the Biden administration working diligently to cause a dramatic increase in the price of energy, to the obvious significant detriment of everyone, and most particularly the poor and minorities. From its first days in office, the Biden crowd has fought pipelines, fought fracking, tried to ban drilling on federal lands, threatened the coal industry, and otherwise tried everything it could think of to decrease the availability and increase the price of energy that works. As one small indication of the results so far, the price of gasoline at the pump, per EIA data, has gone from an average of $2.55/gallon in January 2021 when Biden took office, to $3.16/gallon in August 2021 — an increase of about 24% in under 8 months.

But rest assured that the “environmental justice” crowd has only gotten started in their efforts to impoverish the poor in order to save them. As one indication of what they have in store for us, check out the August 16 article from Nature Sustainability titled “Personal carbon allowances revisited.” Here’s the idea: the government gives everyone a “personal carbon allowance” or PCA for the year. That’s all the carbon you can use, and when you have used up your allowance, it’s no more heat or driving or electricity for you. Then, every year, they just reduce the PCA a little until it gets to zero. Easy. Excerpt:

The literature highlights the importance of economic incentives, cognitive awareness, prevailing social norms and education as drivers for pro-environmental decision-making and behaviour. Research indicates that behavioural change could be engendered by creating a direct and visible incentive to reduce carbon emissions. Studies show that people tend to adhere to the prevailing norm and that descriptive social norms and comparison with others influence decisions about electricity use and mode of transport. Building on this literature, PCAs are envisaged to deliver carbon-emissions-related behavioural change via three interlinked mechanisms: economic, cognitive and social. . . .

Got that? Once the “experts” in our administrative bureaucracies have decreed how much carbon you can use in a year, that will become a social norm, and peer pressure will come to bear upon you not to exceed your limit. So of course you will conform. If December comes and you’ve used up your annual limit, I guess that means that you will just gladly turn off the lights and the heat and freeze.

I haven’t seen this particular idea yet put forth by the Bidenites, but it’s only a question of time.

Read the full article here.

5 16 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
66 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
fretslider
September 7, 2021 6:05 am

“Climate Injustice “

It’s been a rubbish summer, cold grey and wet.

Who do I send my compensation claim to?

Last edited 12 days ago by fretslider
Sara
Reply to  fretslider
September 7, 2021 7:07 am

When you find out, please let me know. I think maybe a class action suit against their specious claims is in order.

Bill Powers
Reply to  Sara
September 9, 2021 12:11 pm

Only problem with a class action suit Sara is The law firm takes 45% of the conference room negotiated settlement and you will get a check for $13.74 as one of of the 10,000,000 listed plaintiffs. Not bad work if you can get it.

Law Partner that is. Your share might cover parking for a couple days depending on where you live.

Reply to  fretslider
September 7, 2021 11:56 am

This is not about compensating anybody. This is a daylight robbery, pure and simple.

fretslider
Reply to  Curious George
September 7, 2021 12:11 pm

I was taking the….

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  fretslider
September 7, 2021 2:26 pm

I was taking the….

Pith?

lee
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
September 7, 2021 7:26 pm

Is that what those helmets are for? 😉

Hutches Hunches
Reply to  fretslider
September 9, 2021 12:52 pm

“Climate Injustice” True Definition

Politicians grabbing hold of the easiest way possible to control populations. Scaring them into submission with horrific predictions of worldwide doom by unscrupulous “Climate Scientists”, whose only real interest in all this is to feed at the trough of public funding…

Bill Toland
September 7, 2021 6:07 am

This means that climate hypocrites like John Kerry would use up their annual carbon allowance in one day given the amount of flying that he does.

Last edited 12 days ago by Bill Toland
Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Bill Toland
September 7, 2021 6:16 am

Lurch ain’t bright.

Reply to  Bill Toland
September 7, 2021 7:16 am

Of course, people like John Kerry are exempt. Just like they are always exempt from the COVID-19 rules they impose on others. Rules that apply to everyone never apply to our “enlightened” betters.

A few questions for Mr. Griffin, Loydo, and other CAGW promoters: Why do the people who tell us global warming is a serious problem never act like it is in their personal life? (Never ever tell me to do something that you will not do yourself first; always lead by example.) Why is the solution to global warming always less liberty, more socialism, and the end of capitalism?

StephenP
Reply to  Wade
September 7, 2021 8:03 am

Not only will the elite be exempt from carbon rationing, they will set the rules so that they continue to be exempt once they have left office or retired.
We plebs will just have to put up with whatever scheme they come up with.

G Mawer
Reply to  Wade
September 7, 2021 9:58 am

Because that seems to be the whole agenda. Climate is the smoke and mirrors!

Spetzer86
Reply to  Bill Toland
September 7, 2021 8:58 am

Doesn’t count when you’re personally “saving the planet”. The tab only adds up when you’re using energy “selfishly”. The really funny thing is that only the “concerned” get to identify selfish usages.

ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 6:17 am

The one child (carbon unit) policy will be enforced, unless of course you are part of the ruling class, special advocacy group, or other recognized donor group and faithful voter block.

LdB
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 6:49 am

Only some western democracies seem stupid enough to go down that path.

SxyxS
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 8:06 am

The one child policy was called by David Rockfeller a huge success ,so he and his co chief of the Bilderbergers( Heinz Kissinger )developed plans to shift western jobs to China and other asian countries(which started under Nixon)which lead to the Lima Agreements and should have ended as final blow as TPP.

As the final goal is what is written on the Georgia Guidestones (world population >500 mio),
the depopulation program must be started somehow.
It would simply be impossible to direct humanity toward Agenda 21 (2030 )without a global catastrophies
as the ice age scare(recycelt global warming,rebranded climate change)
and the Wuhan Lab Virus to achieve the goals of the World Economic Forum ( You will own nothing and you will love it).
It is also no coincidence that any politician is desperate to follow AOC’ s doomsday timeline of 2030 to “save” the planet though AOC’ s dumber than the war criminals biden and Bush combined.

People would never accept submission the direct way,therefore some indirect workarounds are necessary.

Chaswarnertoo
September 7, 2021 6:17 am

These loons are so far wrong it’s difficult to see correct from there.

ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 6:22 am

Of course imported carbon in finished goods from China is not counted. Call it the Xi exemption.

LdB
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 6:50 am

But he has to pay a lot of influencers along the way who are the real traitors.

jono1066
Reply to  ResourceGuy
September 7, 2021 6:58 am

what happened to the first 10 exemptions ?
why start at 11

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  jono1066
September 7, 2021 7:15 am

Because that’s what the BS meter says ?
😉

MarkW
Reply to  jono1066
September 7, 2021 8:27 am

That’s a name, not Roman numerals.

Reply to  MarkW
September 8, 2021 8:46 am

Perhaps jono MLXVI guessed that!

Auto

Tom Halla
September 7, 2021 6:30 am

So of course the Environmental Justice crowd does what amounts to a literally regressive tax policy on energy pricing, and then decries the dire effects on the poor. Looks like chutzpah to me.

bill Johnston
September 7, 2021 6:36 am

It would appear that the agricultural output of the various countries will definitely increase, given the amount of bovine fertilizer being spread around.

Sara
September 7, 2021 7:06 am

Higher levels of global warming????? Where? Not in my AO, not this year, not last year, not any of the years before that!! What a load of hogwash!!!

Someone please ‘splain to me, in words of less that one syllable, just WHERE this global warming is taking place? Only askin’, because it ain’t happening up here in my AO. We got ONE – COUNT ‘EM: ONE!!! 90f day this summer. That’s BELOW normal, even for this area. And whatever “warmth” there was for those two weeks in August that we had some summer heat has vanished like snow in the noonday Sun.

Global warming, my Fat Aunt Harriet!!!!

Are they really on the same planet the rest of us occupy?

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Sara
September 7, 2021 1:48 pm

New Zealand for example just had the warmest winter on record. It was 1.3 degrees C above
the long term average and 0.2 degrees above the previous record set in 2020.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 2:30 pm

Oh, the humanity!

A slightly warmer winter? How did kiwis ever survive?

Herbert
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 2:43 pm

Izaak,
Source of your claim, please.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Herbert
September 7, 2021 2:58 pm

Hi Herbert,
Have a look at:
https://niwa.co.nz/news/its-the-warmest-winter-on-record-again

NIWA is the government owned research institute who keep NZ’s temperature records.

Richard Page
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 3:54 pm

What does ‘adjusted for site changes’ mean on many of the annual temperature averages graphs? What sites were changed in NZ and how much was the adjustment, positive or negative, please? How has that ‘adjustment’ altered the annual temperature average which, until about 2014 was heading for colder winters with a definite downward trend?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Richard Page
September 7, 2021 5:11 pm

Good questions.

I wonder if we will get any answers.

Herbert
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 5:54 pm

Izaak,
No doubt NIWA “homogenised” its raw data.
The BOM in Australia certainly does.
The result according to Dr. Jennifer Marohassy is that since 2018 the raw data of Australia’s 112 recording stations has been homogenised to show an increase of 23% since the preceding period.
This brings Australia into line with the implausible 1.07C global temperature increase since 1850, cited in the recent SMP for AR6 (up from 0.85 C +/- 0.20C in AR5).
Cooling the past and exaggerating the present is now an art form .
This at a time when all GATs show a decline in global temperatures since 2015.
Pass.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Herbert
September 7, 2021 6:13 pm

Herbert,
If you like NIWA maintains a record of 11 stations that have not been moved. According to NIWA

Eleven-station’ seriesThis series comprises a set of eleven stations spanning New Zealand where there have been no significant site moves for many decades. The data used in this series are raw (unadjusted) – no adjustments are required because the measuring sites have not moved significantly. There is a warming trend over the 77-year period 1931-2008 of close to 1 ºC. Note that the 11-station series ends in 2009 and is not being updated.

https://niwa.co.nz/climate/information-and-resources/nz-temperature-record

So the fact that 2021 was the warmest winter on record shouldn’t come as a surprise.

And NIWA will happily provide you with the raw data from their stations if you wish to do you own analysis.

Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 8, 2021 8:59 am

Izaak,
I guess the NZ records actually start in the early 19th Century [Treaty of Waitangi in 1840/1841 IIRC]; the ‘Eleven Station’ record, as you note, goes back to 1931, so perhaps after the birth of a (very) few readers here.
I note that some of the sites in those eleven are at airports: –
“Tauranga Airport, Ruakura (Hamilton), Gisborne Airport, Chateau Tongariro, Palmerston North DSIR/AgResearch, Westport Airport, Molesworth, Queenstown, Invercargill Airport” (incomplete list, but includes all four airports mentioned).
The NWIA ‘seven station series’ has had higher temperatures, notably in 2016 and – by eye – possibly 1998.
The NWIA website does, also, have a very recent article on Winter Snow:
With the winter snowpack starting to build, who’s keeping an eye out on conditions in the mountains?”, so:
– possibly a warmer winter – but still chilly in parts, it appears.

I think the facts you quoted were completely correct, but could, perhaps, have been fuller. Thanks for the work.

Auto

H B
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 6:36 pm

NIWA do what they are told

Derg
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 9:53 pm

This is awesome! Now Nick Stokes doesn’t have to set his thermostat so low to save money…he is rich now 😉

DonM
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 4:25 pm

Very eye opening statistics Izaak.

As a result of the record, above average, compilation temps, how many lost labor hours were there in NZ? That is the stated concern isn’t it … that change will result in worsening conditions?

I realize that lost labor hours were/are projected based on an ‘annual 2 degrees’, but ya gotta be able to find some lost labor hours as associated with the winter 1.3 degrees … can you find us any? No?

Mebbe there were ‘found labor hours’ as a result of the more comfortable winter. Mebbe the people that ignore the found labor hours are the same type of people that adjust the past & present temps. And likely, you don’t care to know.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  DonM
September 7, 2021 6:10 pm

Don,
The question from Sara was “Someone please ‘splain to me, in words of less that one syllable, just WHERE this global warming is taking place? “

Now I know that New Zealand has more than one syllable but hopefully Sara might still be able to understand the answer to her question.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 6:08 pm

Please tell me how much land area NZ covers, as a percentage of the total global surface area.

H B
Reply to  Izaak Walton
September 7, 2021 6:35 pm

According to NZ media that has been rescued (paid off by the govt) and the leftest institutions have rubber stamped it. I worked for them for 20 years I know

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Sara
September 7, 2021 6:06 pm

“WHERE this global warming is taking place?” The Arctic, and anywhere that Griff says.

Kenji
September 7, 2021 7:10 am

My electric utility (PG&E) and water utility (EBMUD) have been giving me bills that compare last years utility use by month to this year’s use. Why? To let you know whether you’ve been a “good citizen” and voluntarily reduced your use of resources. I note these utilities don’t also publish a weather/temperature comparison between last year and this year. Nope … just a comparison of utility USE. Am I supposed to feel guilty for using 0.25 more therms of Nat. Gas. this year? Evidently.

This is the START of mandatory rationing and punitive “excess” USE TAXES. Welcome to the Brave New World of Marxist economic punishment. How DARE you use more water than you did last year! Gavin Newsom has MANDATED a voluntary 15% reduction in water use! Next year? Mandatory punitive reductions.

Here’s what I want my utilities to publish: 1. the salary increases of their executives year over year. How many PSPS black outs year over year. How many rate increases year over year. How many all expenses paid junkets to Bali taken with PUC Staff year over year.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Kenji
September 7, 2021 2:35 pm

Worse, our electricity providers include a graph showing how our electricity consumption relates to similar 1, 2, 3 and 4-person households nearby. They don’t explain how they know how many people live in their customers’ dwellings, though.

Our usage is always as much as or more than a 4-person household, apparently. I don’t use air-conditioning, even though almost everyone does here in the tropics. I don’t use electricity for cooking, even though almost everyone does here, there being no gas main. There are only 2 of us in the house. It’s Bovine Scat, pure and simple.

Last edited 11 days ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
September 7, 2021 7:21 am

There are certainely a lot of people out there feeling guilty of Antarctic ice melt. But that’s over now, it’s not their fault, it’s nobodys fault:
Scientists Now Blame Geothermal Heat For Melting Antarctic Glaciers

According to a new study, 36% of the 1979-2017 Antarctic ice loss was from the Thwaites (pictured) and Pine Island glaciers.Scientists believed this glacier melt was due to anthropogenic climate change “until recently.”
Now they say the glacier mass losses are due to the thin underlying crust and anomalously high geothermal heat in this region.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 7, 2021 8:20 am

A note to griff 😀 😀
WUWT and it’s commenters always were right, despite your contradicting comments 😀 😀

MarkW
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 7, 2021 12:12 pm

Don’t worry, the usual trolls will pop up to proclaim that Mann has published a paper that proves that volcanism is caused by aerosols.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 2:38 pm

Mann is an aerosol

BallBounces
September 7, 2021 8:37 am

If only they spend enough money the future will surely be utopian. /s

September 7, 2021 9:19 am

Relative Potency of Greenhouse Molecules
The forcings due to changing concentrations of Earth’s five most important, naturally occurring greenhouse gases, H2O, CO2, O3, N2O and CH4 as well as CF4 and SF6
were evaluated for the case of a cloud-free atmosphere. The calculation used over 1.5 million lines having strengths as low as 10−27 cm. For a hypothetical, optically thin atmosphere, where there is negligible saturation of the absorption bands, or interference of one type of greenhouse gas with others, the per-molecule forcings are of order 10−22 Watts for H2O, CO2, O3, N2O
and CH4 and of order 10−21 Watts for CF4 and SF6. For current atmospheric concentrations, the per-molecule forcings of the abundant greenhouse gases H2O and CO2 are suppressed by four orders of magnitude. The forcings of the less abundant greenhouse gases, O3, N2O and CH4, are also suppressed, but much less so. For CF4 and SF6, the suppression is less than an order of magnitude because the concentrations of these gases is very low. For current concentrations, the per-molecule forcings are two to four orders of magnitude greater for O3, N2O, CH4, CF4 and SF6 than those of H2O or CO2. Doubling the current concentrations of CO2, N2O or CH4 increases the forcings by a few per cent. A concentration increase of either CF4 or SF6 by a factor of 100 yields a forcing nearly an order of magnitude smaller than that obtained by doubling CO2
. Important insight was obtained using a harmonic oscillator model to estimate the power radiated per molecule. Unlike the most intense bands of the 5 naturally occurring greenhouse gases, the frequency-integrated cross sections of CF4 and SF6 were found to noticeably depend on temperature..

Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases

The atmospheric temperatures and concentrations of Earth’s five most important, green-house gases, H2O, CO2, O3, N2O and CH4control the cloud-free, thermal radiative fluxfrom the Earth to outer space. Over 1/3 million lines having strengths as low as 10−27cmof the HITRAN database were used to evaluate the dependence of the forcing on the gasconcentrations. For a hypothetical, optically thin atmosphere, where there is negligible sat-uration of the absorption bands, or interference of one type of greenhouse gas with others,the per-molecule forcings are of order 10−22W for H2O, CO2, O3, N2O and CH4. For cur-rent atmospheric concentrations, the per-molecule forcings of the abundant greenhouse gasesH2O and CO2are suppressed by four orders of magnitude. The forcings of the less abundantgreenhouse gases, O3, N2O and CH4, are also suppressed, but much less so. For currentconcentrations, the per-molecule forcings are two to three orders of magnitude greater forO3, N2O and CH4, than those of H2O or CO2. Doubling the current concentrations of CO2,N2O or CH4increases the forcings by a few per cent. These forcing results are close topreviously published values even though the calculations did not utilize either a CO2or H2Ocontinuum. The change in surface temperature due to CO2doubling is estimated taking intoaccount radiative-convective equilibrium of the atmosphere as well as water feedback for thecases of fixed absolute and relative humidities as well as the effect of using a pseudoadiabaticlapse rate to model the troposphere temperature. Satellite spectral measurements at variouslatitudes are in excellent quantitative agreement with modelled intensities.

The injustice is not to listen to science and it’s results.

Last edited 12 days ago by Krishna Gans
Ron Waskiewicz
September 7, 2021 9:57 am

I still do not understand why the Democrats hate the poor and middle class, let alone the hundreds of millions in the world who do not even have access to electrical energy.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Ron Waskiewicz
September 7, 2021 10:33 am

But what is even harder to understand is why all these poor, middle class, and minorities continue to support and VOTE for Democrats! I just don’t get it.

Peta of Newark
September 7, 2021 10:05 am

I ain’t entirely too well up on the figures but I’d assert that World Population, very effectively, is already reduced.

Because the 80% (my guesstimate) who rely on carbohydrate food as their Staple Diet are effectively ‘passed away’
OK they still seem to be walking talking and moving around but their

  • chronic depression & belligerence
  • paranoia & buck passing
  • laziness, socialism, political correctness & enforced niceness
  • confusion of empathy with sympathy
  • junk science to match….
  • … the perfectly junk food that they genuinely believe to be ‘good for them’
  • selfishness, greed & hypocrisy esp among the elected leaders
  • physically & mentally completely wasted
  • etc

.. is their death-knell.

Most stories on here are catalogues of same, Zombies & ghosts staggering around in the dark – scared shitless of each other and their own shadows – even before any mysterious magical invisible ‘gases’ make an entrance

Any and all all those things will be the very end of them. They are crowding into and riding in accelerating cars, buses, SUVs and lifestyles with drunks at the wheel of each and every

Vernacular: The lights are on but nobody is home

It is actually Ehrlich’s prediction playing out.
Do not celebrate extra rice production, feel sorry for the poor saps who have to eat that tasteless nutrient-free shyte and have nothing else to eat and will meet a horrible end because of it

The very real concern for the 20% who are still awake & compos-mentis, will the Zombies completely trash the place on their way out?

Which they are, you get addicted to sugar and you are ‘out’
That stuff is not funny & does not ‘mess about’ – it really is a perfect poison

Last edited 12 days ago by Peta of Newark
Mr.
Reply to  Peta of Newark
September 7, 2021 11:00 am

But it’s a self-fulfilling solution Peta, because as we all know, zombies eat other zombies.

So, all good.

TonyG
September 7, 2021 10:08 am

“Hang on — even assuming that “high temperature days” are increasing (they are not) does anyone actually lose “labor hours” due to high temperature days?”

I would assume they mean mostly manual labor, especially construction. When I lived in So.CA, many times during the hottest part of summer, I saw many construction crews just bring in a lot of bright lighting and work at night instead.

TonyG
Reply to  TonyG
September 7, 2021 1:38 pm

a$$ume is automodded too, really? I know that’s WP, but seriously people, this is an OLD issue. These programmers are living in the 90’s

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  TonyG
September 7, 2021 2:40 pm

It was difficult if you lived in Scunthorpe in the 90s, to be sure.

Edit: Ha ha! Still is apparently. This comment is awaiting moderation!

Last edited 11 days ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
TonyG
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
September 8, 2021 7:06 am

ZigZag that’s what I mean about WP programmers living in the 90’s. That infamous town, words like a$$ume and sk!ll – but simple substitutions in the actual words (like k!ll) get past the filters.

Then again, I’ve seen the WordPress code, so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

n.n
September 7, 2021 10:13 am

Sequester the carbon! 50 shades of selective-child per chance one-child. The competition between leftists is wicked.

CD in Wisconsin
September 7, 2021 10:17 am

“But rest assured that the “environmental justice” crowd has only gotten started in their efforts to impoverish the poor in order to save them.”

Or, as I have heard it said, government runs a racket where it breaks your leg, hands you a set of crutches and then takes credit for your ability to around on them.

Never mind that government broke your leg in the first place. And people buy into it.

Eisenhower
September 7, 2021 12:56 pm

Sorry kids Santa just tweeted from North Pole that the elves opertions exceeded their CO2 caps and so there will be no Christmas this year.

Chris Hanley
September 7, 2021 2:56 pm

Minorities minorities minorities, every person on the planet is a minority, a minority of one.

Tom Abbott
September 7, 2021 5:01 pm

From the article: “To secure an equitable economic future, the United States must ensure that environmental and economic justice are key considerations in how we govern.”

What exactly is environmental and economic justice?

More ill-defined terms used by the Left. It’s like using “climate change” when talking about the weather, to confuse the issue.

The Left thinks if it can keep the Peons confused, they can make money and acquire additional political power off the confusion.

Last edited 11 days ago by Tom Abbott
bill Johnston
Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 7, 2021 6:41 pm

The lefts game plan seems to be working. Much to the ire and consternation of thinking persons.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
September 8, 2021 9:12 am

Tom,
The Left thinks if it can keep the Peons confused, they can TAKE money and acquire additional political power off the confusion.”

An improvement, possibly?
The Left is not very good at making money.
Printing it – maybe.
Taking it – oh, for sure [See Boris’s latest bonzer wheeze, jacking up taxes on all workers; and, yes, I can remember when Boris pretended he was a Tory!].

Auto

%d bloggers like this: