Skip to comments.Obama's Next Move: the Global Warming Tax [global wealth redistribution]
Posted on 11/28/2012 1:59:18 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
This week the United Nations begins two weeks of climate talks in Doha, Qatar. The primary goal of these meetings is to draw President Obama into accepting a redistribution plan designed extract money from the U.S. economy in the form of a global warming tax and doling out the cash to Third World nations.
"There will be expectations from countries to hear a new voice from the United States," said Jennifer Morgan, director of the climate and energy program at the World Resources Institute in Washington......
[SNIP of information]
...The lame duck Obama administration will likely be all over this UN plan. As a U.S. senator in 2008, Obama sponsored a bill known as the "Global Poverty Act." The bill would have made levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations.
Obama's bill would have required the president "to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, [and] the elimination of extreme global poverty..."
The primary vehicle for such a redistribution plan would be a tax or fee on businesses that produce carbon dioxide as a byproduct of their activities. This could include power plants, refineries, cement manufacturers, and dairy farmers. Those increased costs of production would be passed along to the consumer in the form of higher prices.
A tax on carbon dioxide would also be seen by politicians as a way to offset our severe budget deficit and staggering national debt. It would be sold to the American public in the name of saving the planet.
Obama may be another step closer to realizing his 2008 dream of massive global wealth redistribution.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
In March 1988, a few months before NASA's James Hansen asserted before the Congress that global warming was in progress, the New York Times quoted him as saying that he used 59 degrees Fahrenheit as the average global temperature to calculate the temperature variations......
[BIG snip of good information]
.....The IPCC too now uses 14 degrees Celsius as its base temperature, as can be seen from a graph that is part of its 2007 document. (As an aside, it was in 2007 that IPCC won the Nobel Peace Prize. IPCC certainly deserved a Nobel Prize, but it should have been for literature, as the organization had excelled in writing fantasy.)
More recently, a 2011 report by the Government Accountability Office attributes an estimated average surface air temperature of 287 K, or 14 degrees Celsius, to James Hansen and his colleagues.
But Hansen and colleagues have estimated that Earth's actual average surface air temperature between 1951 and 1980 was approximately 287 K (14 degrees Celsius) (Hansen et al. 2010).
It is hard to pinpoint the exact date when the change from 15 degrees to 14 degrees was introduced. It most likely happened sometime in 1997, and definitely no later than January of 1998.
The 1998 edition of the annual publication of Worldwatch Institute uses 14 degrees Celsius as the global average temperature and provides details of how it was informed of the change from 15 degrees Celsius. On page 69 of the report, a footnote below the table listing the global average temperatures for several years states:
Base number is 1 degree Celsius lower than in earlier Vital Signs.
On page 174 of the same report, we see the explanation for the change.
In earlier versions of Vital Signs, Worldwatch added the temperature change reported by the Goddard Institute to an estimated global temperature of 15 degrees Celsius, but the institute has since informed Worldwatch that a better base number would be 14 degrees Celsius. James Hansen, Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, email to author, 18 January 1998.
In other words, James Hansen sent word that 14 is the new 15.
“A tax on carbon dioxide would also be seen by politicians as a way to offset our severe budget deficit and staggering national debt. It would be sold to the American public in the name of saving the planet.”
People have to want to be led by the nose to believe that the earth needs us to save it.
They do.....and they do.
Witness: Nov. 6th.
Do you want to pay for one carbon or two oxygens?
I control all fire and oxidation!
I control the oceans, H2O tax is coming round the bend over Western Civilization.
Harvard School of Public Health: Creation Care introduction for busy pastors " During the summer of 2008, Paul Epstein and staff from the Center worked with Pastor Ken Wilson of the Vineyard Church in Ann Arbor, MI to create and update these booklets. The inspiration for these booklets can be traced to the Scientists and Evangelicals Initiative's first meeting in Thomasville, Georgia.
Updates include revised content, a list of scientific readings, and the formation of a scientific advisory committee consisting of 17 top scientists who have volunteered to serve as a resource to pastors, answering questions and possibly participating in sermons.
Five thousand copies of the booklet were printed and sent out to evangelical pastors, along with a copy of the "What If..." DVD created by the NAE to provide evangelical background information on climate change, and a DVD of the PBS "God and Global Warming" program from the Scientist-Evangelical Alaska Expedition led by the Center in August 2007."
Creation Care SCIENTIFIC Advisory Committee ".......James Hansen Ph.D. Director NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies - And 16 Others.
The Steering Committee
Rev. Dr. Owen Owens, Co-chair, NRCCC Past chair, National Council of Churches Eco-Justice Working Group;
director, Environmental Ministries, American Baptist Churches USA Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Rabbi Dr. Warren Stone, Co-chair, NRCCC Chair, Central Conference of American Rabbis, Environmental Affairs Committee; Senior Rabbi, Temple Emanuel-El;
delegate, COP-3, Kyoto, Japan and COP-15, Copenhagen, Denmark; Kensington, Maryland
Dr. Robert Marshall, Treasurer Chairman of the Board, Christians for the Mountains, Charleston, West Virginia
Carlos Agnesi President, Interreligious Council of Mexico;
past CEO, Lloyds of Mexico, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
Rev. Tom Carr, chairman, New England Interreligious Council on the Environment;
pastor, First Baptist Church, West Hartford, Connecticut
Dr. Thomas English Creation Care Educator, Presbyterian Church USA;
director, TE Endangered Species Institute, San Diego, California
Dr. Mirele Goldsmith Representative for Hazon, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, New York, New York
Connie Hanson President, Christians Caring for the Creation;
Presbyterian Church of America Pasadena, California
Rev. Dr. Olin Ivey Chairman, Earth Care Tennessee;
Pastor, United Methodist Church and United Church of Christ, Chattanooga, Tennessee
Allen Johnson First interim director, Evangelical Environmental Network;
Executive Director, Christians for the Mountains, Dunmore, West Virginia
Frederick W. Krueger, Executive coordinator Santa Rosa, California
$6 TRILLION in debt transfers maybe a drop in the bucket.
2009 article: Obama's Biggest Radical When Barack Obama nominated John P. Holdren as his Science Adviser last December 20, the president-elect stated "promoting science isnt just about providing resources" but "ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology." In nominating John Holdren, his words could scarcely have taken a more Orwellian ring.
Some critics have noted Holdren's penchant for making apocalyptic predictions that never come to pass, and categorizing all criticism of his alarmist views as not only wrong but dangerous. What none has yet noted is that Holdren is a globalist who has endorsed "surrender of sovereignty" to "a comprehensive Planetary Regime" that would control all the world's resources, direct global redistribution of wealth, oversee the "de-development" of the West, control a World Army and taxation regime, and enforce world population limits. He has castigated the United States as "the meanest of wealthy countries," written a justification of compulsory abortion for American women, advocated drastically lowering the U.S. standard of living, and left the door open to trying global warming "deniers" for crimes against humanity. Such is Barack Obama's idea of a clear-headed adviser on matters of scientific policy.
First Lab on the Left
All of these positions are consistent with a man who began his career as a "dissident scientist." Peter Collier remembers Holdren working by day at a national laboratory and by night writing for Ramparts, the intellectual journal of the New Left. Holdren has authored numerous books and journal articles with his mentors Paul and Anne Ehrlich, the infamous doomsayers who predicted overpopulation would force most of the world's population to perish during the 1980s "great die-off." Holdren has gone on to a distinguished academic career in his own right. A longtime professor at the University of California at Berkeley, Teresa Heinz Kerry used her late husband's tax-exempt billions to endow a chair at Harvard for Ehrlich's disciple; Holdren is now the Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, where his (and her) ideas influence the next generation of policymakers. Holdren himself has a background in political "philanthropy," serving for 14 years on John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation's Board of Trustees, steering its grants to far-Left organizations. He also pursued the intersection of science and diplomacy by joining the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, an organization founded during the Cold War by former nuclear scientist and fellow traveler Joseph Rotblat. Pugwash hewed to the Communist Party line and was subsequently feted by Czechslovakian and Polish Communist leaders.............................."
.............Holdren believed a world government might play a moderate role in the future: setting and enforcing appopriate population levels, taxing and redistributing the world's wealth, controlling the world's resources, and operating a standing World Army.
Such a comprehensive Plenetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable...not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes...The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade...The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries' shares within their regional limits...the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits. (p. 943.)
Part of the power wielded by this "Regime" would be in the form of a World Army. The trio wrote that the United States must destroy all its nuclear arsenal. But this would not render us defenseless against Communist aggression. "Security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force...The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization" (p. 917, emphasis added)..................................."
.......Making You Poorer For Your Own Good
The function of such welfare is twofold: to enrich citizens of the Global South and to impoverish Americans for their own good. In a 2006 paper, Holdren noted that reducing "GDP per person" -- that is, cutting your personal wealth -- also reduces Greenhouse Gas emissions. True, it is "not a lever that most people would want to use to reduce emissions"; "People are not getting rich as fast as they think, however, if GDP growth is being achieved at the expense of the environmental underpinnings of well-being" (pp. 15-16).
Holdren addressed the economic costs of his massive restructuring of the economy some 32 years ago, acknowledging it "will entail considerable retraining and temporary unemployment in the workforce" (p. 853). Yet he continues to support economy-crushing energy taxation. In a 1997 press conference, he surmised that if alternative energy sources were to get a foothold, either they "would have to get a great deal cheaper, which seems unlikely, or natural gas would have to get considerably more expensive. The latter is actually a good idea." One is hardly encouraged to learn that last December, environmentalist Dr. James Hansen sent a four-page letter via Holdren to "Michelle and Barack." (Hansen wrote it as surgeons in Vienna placed a stent in his wife's chest following an unexpected heart attack.) His personal note to "John" states, "When gasoline hits $4-5/gallons again, most of that should be tax." Five months earlier, Holdren rated Hansen "one of the most distinguished climate scientists in the world." ......................"
2016 can’t get here soon enough.......
2016 won’t help us.
By then we will be Greece.
Obama hasn’t got enough on his hands bankrupting us, He wants to give what we have left to someone else.
Share the love, people.
You stole everything you have from the people of superior melanin content and Obama is going to make sure you give it back to Africa.
You must be able to read Obama’s mind.
IMO that is exactly what he feels.
How bout we just give Obama back to Africa?!?!
[a small excerpt]
"U.S. Blood and Treasure for the UN
The redistribution of blood and treasure were high priorities for Holdren [Obama's Science and Technology adviser], et. al. They advised the "de-development of overdeveloped countries...should be given top priority"..., and such nations -- e.g., the United States and the developed West -- should "divert their excess productivity into helping the poorer people of the world rather than exploiting them"....
How much wealth redistribution would be sufficient? The authors favorably cited a proposal that "the rich nations devote 20 percent of their GNPs for ten or fifteen years to the task of population control and development of the poor countries." They comment, "We believe an effort of this magnitude is not only justified but essential."... Reaffirming the goal in his 1995 Nobel speech, he stretched this to a program "sustained over several decades." (Emphasis added.)
He detailed the mechanism for global socialism just two years ago. In a February 2007 report of which he was a coordinating lead author, urges the United Nations to undertake "a global framework" that is "more comprehensive and ambitious" than the Kyoto Protocol. Holdren states the UN must mandate "A requirement for the early establishment of a substantial price on carbon emissions in all countries, whether by a carbon tax or a tradable permit approach." Although he prefers a global carbon tax presided over by a United Nations-strength IRS, he is open to a stringent global cap-and-trade program. However, that program must contain: "A means for transferring some of the revenue produced by carbon taxes upon, or permits purchased by, countries and consumers with high incomes and high per capita emissions to countries and consumers with low incomes and low per capita emissions".... (Emphases in original.)............"
At what point do we break out the pitchforks and torches?
you can forget about 2016, I already knew it was too late this time around, it’s not going to miraculously get better.
Doha would be a bunch of tents if it wasn’t for natural gas. Let’s have the Qatari pay for the CO2 right up front and take the money out of their cut of the pie. Better yet, let’s take off and nuke it from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.