Essay by Eric Worrall
According to the Lowy Institute, “Misplaced faith in private sector solutions delays the redistribution of trillions…”
Private finance cannot lead the global response to climate change
Misplaced faith in private sector solutions delays the redistribution
of trillions from developed countries and multilateral institutions.In response to the looming trillion-dollar global climate finance shortfall, a broad array of policymakers, international bureaucrats, environmentalists, and financial institutions have called for the urgent scaling up of private climate investments.
The logic of private finance mobilisation starts by recognising that developing countries will need climate finance “amounting to US$5.8–5.9 trillion up until 2030”. In the face of such eye-watering sums, private finance offers an enticing solution. By leveraging comparatively small government financing into substantial private investments, governments and international organisations can turn “billions into trillions”, sidestepping the problem facing developed countries of how to justify domestically the global redistribution of trillions of dollars.
Alternatively, developing countries have advocated for a suite of multilateral measures, including sovereign debt cancellation, the redistribution of IMF-issued Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), increased concessional development financing, and even global carbon taxes. These proposals are often perceived to be concerned with global justice and equity, as opposed to efficacy. However, this distinction becomes blurred when the US$5.8–5.9 trillion climate finance needs of developing countries are interrogated more closely.
…
Private finance is clearly no panacea for the climate crisis. It is no wonder that the developing countries have long called for far more drastic levels of public and multilateral financing. Rather than seeking to pursue global economic justice alone, developing countries have been acutely aware that trillions of developed country government dollars need to be put on the table. If developing country financing asks are honoured, US$5.8–5.9 trillion would be well within reach. But the challenge remains getting developed countries on board. Proposals such as political economist Dani Rodrik’s “bridging compact” hold some promise, although any equivalent global consensus could only emerge following the recognition that a private finance-centred approach doesn’t provide a workable alternative.
…
Read more: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/private-finance-cannot-lead-global-response-climate-change
And they wonder why we call them climate communists.
Imagine what a rushed removal of $5.8-5.9 trillion from the economies of wealthy nations would do to schools, hospitals, roads, policing, all the things which matter to ordinary people?
The funniest part, China, which still insists it is a developing country, would be a net recipient of a large slice of this pie, which would have to be funded by borrowing money from China.
I believe the fake climate crisis movement is on the verge of collapsing under the weight of its own absurdity.
Back when climate advocates were stringing everyone along with the nonsense claim that renewables were affordable and would bring down energy bills, people accepted the falsehoods. The current green Aussie government won office on the back of a claim their modest green investments would bring down energy bills.
I don’t think anyone serious still believes the nonsensical claim that renewables are cheap.
“I believe the fake climate crisis movement is on the verge of collapsing under the weight of its own absurdity.” I sincerely hope that is true.
Now I could get them that money within 5 years without destroying the economies of several developed countries…
Defund the COPs
Defund Davos
Or simply Defund Paris…no trillion$ necessary
Also, all the big billionaire so-called charitable orgs funding destruction of Western Civilization should be delisted, backtaxed, with huge penalties, subject to class action suits to pay for damages to a billion or two citizens, charged with sedition, jailed, …want to add anything, anyone?
That’s a great idea. Leftwing billionaires are financing the destruction of the Western Democracies, so let’s take all their money away as part of the penalty they have to pay for their destruction of our economies and societies.
Congress needs to investigate these leftwing billionaires, and neutralize them, starting with George Soros. They are poison to our societies and our personal freedoms.
Unless he really is the devil incarnate that he seems to be, he can’t last many more years. He already looks like a cross between a partially re-animated corpse and Emperor Palpatine.
His son is just as looney and evil, if not moreso.
Yes, his son is carrying on his legacy of destroying Western civilization. He is a frequent visitor to the White House.
I for one certainly wouldn’t want to suggest disembowelment, drawing and quartering, embrace of the iron maiden, or death by a thousand cuts inflicted by sharks with frickin’ laser beams on their heads. That would be evil.
Earth Day is also Lenin’s Birthday.
I hadn’t noticed that – thanks Tom.
And only 2 days after Hitler’s birthday.
Lenin’s Birthday was rebranded as Earth Day to make it more palatable to a society not yet embracing communism. But that was 1970. Things have changed. Watch for renaming back to its real name reflecting its true purpose.
These people say they are scientists
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_BoZDS1gjU
We can’t save the West Antarctic. So what now?
Obviously not very good at research.. how did she get a PhD ..
…. oh wait.. it’s in “climate science™”, so making the right farting noises is enough
West Antarctic has been COOLING for a long time.
And has also cooled some 1.8ºC since 1999
New Study Finds Most Of Antarctica Has Cooled By Over 1°C Since 1999…W. Antarctica Cooled 1.8°C (notrickszone.com)
UAH shows the air over the Antarctic doing not very much in either direction… ie basically ZERO trend
How does the climate crisis agenda differ from say, the Fabian socialist agenda? Not by much.
Socialism is that the State owns the means of production. We are capitalistic, individuals and corporations own the means of production.
And fascism is where the Big Corporates collude with the government to control the people.
Beat me to the punch gezz’
Our socialists are of the fascist variety. The brand of socialism introduced by the socialist party member Mussolini and made infamous by the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (aka Nazis)
No, communism is the state owns the means of production. Socialism is where private individuals own the means of production but the state makes all the important decisions.
We are much closer to socialism, we haven’t been a capitalist country in about 100 years.
State communism collapsed in 1989-91. The collapse of the Soviet Union was the end of it and witnessed the demolishing of all of Europe’s official Communist parties.
However, that didn’t mean that communism itself vanished. Not likely. It simply made the easy morph into Europe’s assorted Green parties. There is no difference whatsoever between state communism of yesteryear and the green communism of the last three decades. They all have the same methodology: identify a group and steal from them everything they own.
We aren’t exactly experiencing socialism either. At least in the U.S. and Europe, we are experiencing what I call bureaucracyism. That is the government bureaucracy exponentially expanding its power by increasing regulation. In other words, the political elite knowing best how people should live, what they should have available to purchase, and what should be spent on increasing the size and power of the government.
Nanny-statism is nothing less than fascism.
Which is nothing less than a form of socialism.
That is socialism.
Bloomberg’s green-energy research team estimated it would cost $US200 Trillion to stop Global Warming by 2050.
There is only $US40 trillion in cash, checking, and savings in the world.
There are about 2 billion households in the world, so that is $US100,000 per household.
Ninety percent of the world’s households can’t afford anything additional so the households in developed nations will have to pay 10 times as much to cover it.
That means about $US 1 million per household in developed countries or about $US 35,000 per year for 27 years. The working people can’t afford anything near that.
The millionaires and billionaires have about $US208 billion. That would cover it, but they won’t give up their wealth.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-05/-200-trillion-is-needed-to-stop-global-warming-that-s-a-bargain#xj4y7vzkg
Most households would rather have the $US1 million and a degree or two of warming.
Maybe, IF they were related. Which they are NOT! There is no proof or even an intelligent guess, that mankind is causing ANY atmospheric warming. The very very slow and minor warming is natural in cause.
“The very very slow and minor warming is natural in cause.”
Yes, it is, until proven otherwise, and it has never been proven otherwise.
I assume that the 200 trillion would be used to reduce CO2 emissions. But there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on our global climate. The AGW hypothesis has been falsified by science.. Mankind does not even know what the optimum global climate actually is let alone how to achieve it. In terms of improving our global climate, the 200 trillion would buy us nothing. Here in the USA before we spend our money on anything else we need to help our federal government pay off its debt of more than 33.7 trillion dollars.
.
“Misplaced faith in private sector solutions delays the redistribution
of trillions from developed countries and multilateral institutions.”
What right to other countries have to another nations wealth?
Answer: None.
What developed nations should do is forget the “Net Zero” and the roadblocks that throws up and allow the private sector to go in and help those “undeveloped” nations build their own energy wealth.
Socialists methods of establishing right to other nations’ wealth was established by both national and marxist socialisms: outright military conquest. Defeat the target country, kill everyone there and loot everything they owned. There was no difference between Hitler and Stalin. And if they are all dead, no one is left to object.
There are still atavists who believe in this kind of ideology of kill all your neighbors and loot everything they have: Vladimir Putin and Iran’s mercenaries in Hamas and Hezbollah.
“There are still atavists who believe in this kind of ideology of kill all your neighbors and loot everything they have: Vladimir Putin and Iran’s mercenaries in Hamas and Hezbollah.”
Don’t leave out the inspiration for all this evil in the Middle East: The Mad Mullahs of Iran.
They believe in death to anyone who doesn’t look at the world the way they look at the world. It doesn’t matter what race, color or creed you are, if you don’t believe in what they believe in, then they want to kill you. If you are not a fellow psychopath, then you are in trouble with them.
What right do other countries have to another nation’s wealth?
The same right that individuals have to another person’s wealth. They want it.
Since wind and sunlight are free, why should they need any money at all?
$5.8 to 5.9 trillion is a remarkably precise estimate of the funding they demand. Only $100 billion (pocket change!) between the low and high estimates. Teams of accountants at the UNFCCC must have slaved over it for months to reach that conclusion.
But I have to wonder if they accounted for monies going to swell the Swiss bank accounts of leaders of certain less reputable developing countries. I think they should have a 100% contingency for those eventualities.
Not to worry because there’s no way consumers will tolerate the type of price and tax increases necessary for such financing.
At least one “renewable” energy source is indeed cheap – hydropower. Those nations (like Norway) or regions (like the US Pacific Northwest) that enjoy large scale hydropower production have significantly cheaper retail electric power rates than those that don’t.
But the warmunists don’t like hydropower, or nuclear power, because they rob the warmies of their demands for solar and wind.
There isn’t enough to power everything, and even hydropower is weather dependent, as China found out in last year’s severe drought.
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/22/china-drought-causes-yangtze-river-to-dry-up-sparking-shortage-of-hydropower
There is no climate crisis. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect upon our global climate. The AGW hypothesis has been falsified by science. The climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has absolutely no control what so ever. World wide trillions of dollars have already been spent trying to fight climate change yet no one is saying that there has been any improvement. Mankind does not even know what the optimum global climate actually is let alone how to achieve it The USA.s federal government is more than 33.7 trillion dollars in debt and has no money to waste on this.
Private or public money. Doesn’t matter. It is still the workingman who will evetually pay the bill. One way or another.
The authors want to do away with the free market being involved, and just have the Western governments hand over the money. It’s simpler that way, and faster, for them.
The U.S. is at record debt limits now, and if abortion doesn’t derail the Republicans in the 2024 elections, then the budget is going to be getting a lot of attention, and there won’t be huge spending increases if Republicans get control. At least not to the level of what the Democrats would spend.
Republicans will probably have to raise spending for things like national defense, which always happens when a Democrat leaves the White House, and Republicans take over and have to rebuild the military the Democrats allowed to languish.
Trump’s first day in office, his Defense Secretary came to him and told him the military was critically short of ammunition, thanks to the failure of the Obama-Biden administration to keep it resupplied.
I imagine when Trump takes office next time, his Defense Secretary will come to him and tell him something similar. So don’t blame Trump is defense spending has to be increased to make up for the Biden administrations neglect.
Remember what Trump and Reagan say: Peace through Strength.
It works. But this requires us to be strong, and for all the bad guys to know we are strong, and are willing and able to defend ourselves.
The Mad Mullahs of Iran don’t get that impression from the Biden Administration.
You want to know what appeasement looks like? How about American forces in the Middle East being attacked 47 times since October 7, and all Biden has done is bomb two storage facilities, at night, so he doesn’t kill anyone. And no mention of the Mad Mullahs orchestration of all these attacks. The Mad Mullahs have Biden pegged. They know they can get away with murder and he won’t do anything about it because his boss, Obama, is in love with the Mad Mullahs.
The response Biden should take is to blockade Iran’s ports and prevent them from shipping any more oil. And if the Mad Mullahs want to put up a military fight of some kind, he should take that opportunity to destroy the nuclear weapons production facilities of the Mad Mullahs.
If it even looks like the U.S. is going to go hard after the Mad Mullahs, I believe the citizens of Iran would rise up and throw the Mad Mullahs out. All they need is a little encouragement. Something no American president has given them so far. But they are ready. They are just looking for the opportunity to throw off these insane religious fanatics that are running their country.
If i was the American president, I would be coordinating with all the anti-Mad Mullah groups in Iran and would be telling them to get ready because help is on the way.
No need to imagine, ordinary US citizens are living it. That’s about the cost of the wars in the middle east.
And there you have it folks
magical thinking!
I’ll take “What is Climate Thievery?” for $200, Alex.
I’ll take “Crony Capitalism” for $200 Alex.
Ok, Bruce. “It is called the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ in a nod to George Orwell”
Bruce: “What is Climate Thievery?”
You are right Eric people are beginning to wake up to this sham. If we can get our message out to the regular guy all of this nonsense will end.
Redistribution does not work, it never has. I am convinced that you can take from those that have and give to those that don’t and you will have changed nothing. All you will accomplish is make those who have worse off.
I have brother in law whose grandpa and great uncle worked hard and built quite an empire for our neck of the woods. When the grandpa and uncle died the kids and grandkids inherited sizable sums, enough that some thought they would never have to work again. People asked if I was jealous, I said no I want the family to get their windfall they are going to spend it, they will be better off for a while and the community can use the money they will spend. In the end they will be right back where they were before, it took ten years for some, 15 or 20 for the rest but in the end they were basically back where they started, a little better off maybe but not much.
There is no better form of redistribution than giving your family your money, everyone benefits.