Posted on 02/28/2014 4:30:44 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Environmentalists are pushing a new way to deal with global warming and overpopulation: the U.S. needs to “de-grow” its economy.
What is “de-growth”? It means forcing people to work less to make them more equal, consume fewer goods and use less electricity. Think of it like camping, but for the rest of your life.
Environmentalists at the New Economics Foundation in London and the Worldwatch Institute in Washington, D.C. argue that cutting the 40-hour work week and using less electricity is necessary. This includes a living wage requirement and a more progressive tax code.
“There’s no such thing as sustainable growth, not in a country like the U.S.,” Worldwatch senior fellow Erik Assadourian told Sierra Magazine.
“We have to de-grow our economy, which is obviously not a popular stance to take in a culture that celebrates growth in all forms,” he said. “But as the saying goes, if everyone consumed like Americans, we’d need four planets.”
De-growing the economy means working less and consuming fewer goods and electricity — the foundation of modern life. Most cheap, reliable electricity that businesses and homes rely to power their everyday needs comes from sources like coal, natural gas and nuclear power — which environmentalists argue are killing the planet.
“If we had a livable wage and could each work a 20-hour week,” Assadourian said, “we’d have time to choose more sustainable options that are also better for ourselves.”
With the world population projected to be 10 billion by 2050, Assadourian and others argue that cutting the work week would allow everyone to have a job and enjoy life more.
“Why do we work? What do we do with the money we earn?” asks Anna Coote, head of social policy at the New Economics Foundation. “Can we begin to think differently about how much we need—to get out of the fast lane and live life at a more sustainable pace, to do things that are better for the planet, better for ourselves?”
“Whether you move to a smaller house or an apartment, downsize to one or no car, or simply have fewer lattes to-go, a smaller paycheck could reduce consumption overall,” noted Sierra Magazine, a publication of the Sierra Club, which is an anti-fossil fuel and nuclear power environmental group.
“We could cook dinner instead of unwrapping and microwaving it, Assadourian suggests, or hang laundry to dry, which would cut electricity use and let us spend time in the sun,” the magazine added.
Assadourian and Coote aren’t the only ones with Malthusian points of view. About a month ago, former Vice President Al Gore suggested that “fertility management” was crucial to fighting global warming and promoting development in poor countries.
“Depressing the rate of child mortality, educating girls, empowering women and making fertility management ubiquitously available — so women can choose how many children and the spacing of children — is crucial to the future shape of human civilization,” Gore said on an international panel on global warming in January.
“Africa is projected to have more people than China and India by mid-century; more than China and India combined by end of the century, and this is one of the causal factors that must be addressed,” the failed presidential candidate added.
But one man’s paradise is another man’s hell. Many of Sierra Magazine’s commentators did not think “de-growth” was such a good idea.
“At least you’re honest about your agenda of lowering people’s standard of living. Very few people on the Left are so honest,” one commenter said. “But as always, some animals are more equal than others. When Michelle Obama starts hanging the family laundry out to dry on the White House lawn, please let us know.”
“This is pure Socialist Horse Manure! ‘so we need to spread the money around more evenly,’” said another.
Secretary of State John Kerry is a rabid environmentalist and is dictating foreign policy based on "climate change."
Obama's new White House policy adviser John Podesta [a Hillary advocate], past President, Chair and Counselor of the Center for American Progress is there to help structure Obama's WH policy EO's toward deep environmental [read "socialist"] aims.
Center for American Progress is the lead on the Democratic Party's liberal superstructure.
J.R. Dunn - July 2012: "..................All the groups involved in the Wisconsin campaign were superstructure groups. The unions, the very core organizations of the superstructure, without which it's no more than a pack of vegetarians and aging hippies. The media, which serves as its propaganda arm. And the judiciary, which is broadly infiltrated by leftist partisans whose allegiance has been awarded to something other than the law.
But it's when we review the Prosser accusations that the picture attains clarity. According to Byron York, the story (which had been held back for nearly two weeks) was first reported by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism working with Wisconsin Public Radio. (Two guesses as to which end of the spectrum they lean toward.) The Prosser story was billed as the result of a project funded by the Open Society Institute to enlighten the public about Wisconsin government.
The report was picked up by ThinkProgress, the strike force for the Center for American Progress, which both tweeted and posted the story, as well as calling for Justice Prosser's ouster.
The interesting thing here is that the Open Society and the Center for American Progress are the flagship organizations of the liberal superstructure, the outfits that call the shots, handle the funding, and coordinate efforts. They are also funded by Old Spooky himself, George Soros. The left rolled out their big units for this effort. Why? To wreck the career of a junior state Supreme Court justice? To take control of the Dairy State? Perhaps so, but I believe it was also in hopes of testing out the superstructure as a political delivery system in a relatively closed environment."..............Democrats Unveil the Weapon of the Future
Holdren was asked by Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions to cite scientific data that supported claims that droughts and other weather events were being made worse by global warming. Sessions then cited contradicting evidence from climate scientists, including former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer and University of Colorado climate scientist Roger Pielke, Jr.
Holdren countered that the likes of Pielke and Spencer “are not representative of the mainstream scientific opinion on this point.”...........................
Excerpted article in Post #2 correction:
Date: 2-26-14
When they agree to de-grow their foundations, I will agree to talk to them.
>> “Why do we work? What do we do with the money we earn?” asks Anna Coote
Well, Anna... if I had to guess, I’ll bet you use your big honkin’ salary on gas for your SUV, designer pantsuits made by slave labor in Sri Lanka, and tony vacations to Nepal and Galapagos.
Green elites are the absolute biggest hypocrites that exist on this supposedly overcrowded planet!
-— Population Bomb” co-author with Paul and Anne Ehrlich (along with other publications -—
After Ehrich’s infamous wager with Julian Simon, this Malthusian should be embarrassed to show his face in public.
But they have no shame, just a very, very strange religion.
Or 1/10th of the government we currently have, so people and their markets could figure out temporary resource allocation problems without meddling by feckless dilettantes.
The Obama Administration is apparently filled with true believers in "de-growth" - they are doing everything they can to de-grow America as much as they can before their term is up.
We’re dealing with eco-Nazis who can’t be reasoned with. If you don’t know how to fight or use weaponry, start learning today. If you’re a skilled warrior, teach others those necessary skills. Finally, if you’re in a red commie state, move to a blue patriot state now. It’s time to muster.
Capitalism provides the opportunity to work hard and become wealthy.
Socialism mandates universal poverty.
Will The Overselling Of Global Warming Lead To A New Scientific Dark Age?
".....The scientific establishment has painted itself into a corner over global warming. [Garth] Paltridge’s explanations for this are depressingly familiar to those who read these columns.
Science changed dramatically in the 1970s, when the reward structure in the profession began to revolve around the acquisition of massive amounts of taxpayer funding that was external to the normal budgets of the universities and federal laboratories. In climate science, this meant portraying the issue in dire terms, often in alliance with environmental advocacy organizations. Predictably, scientists (and their institutions) became addicted to the wealth, fame, and travel in the front of the airplane:......."
People who tend to sit in focus groups and chat on sustainable growth versus unsustainable growth....probably have never worked a day in their lives, and get some kind of paycheck from a foundation, that usually has some kind of agenda that is best not discussed in public unless it’s by their dimwits of public statement.
To make this all simple. Anyone who thinks they’ve got the magic wand, the Holy Grail of control over business, the alchemy of economics, the enchantment of society hope and change, the sorcery of Fed manipulation to save America, and the voodoo of environmentalism to stop that terrible carbon stuff (pretend it’s pollution and it’ll freak out the savages in the village)....then they’d best start looking for a new line of work.
De-growth doesn’t work at the muffler shop. De-growth doesn’t work at Pizza Hut. De-growth has no application to beer distribution efforts. De-growth isn’t an element of NCAA bowl choices or gimmicks. De-growth isn’t something that the NFL would use, or Delta Airlines, or Apple. I frankly can’t see de-growth being applied to Disney World, the Vikings of Minnesota, or Texas State Fairs.
Maybe CNN could use this de-growth gimmick....just grow small enough....that they disappear. Maybe in that sense....we need it.
That “livable wage” has to come from somewhere.
Or they could just cut to the chase and go for the ultimate goal - mass reduction of the human population.
So if these enviro-marxists are oh so concerned about de-growing, why are they headquartered in London and D.C.? Shouldn't they be operating out of tents in an Indian reservation or some other equally low-tech area?
If the “greenies” like the de-growth thing so much, how ‘bout they live in some 10” x 10” cabin subdivision without sewers, heat or running water. No car either. If and when they ALL do that, maybe they’d be almost credible.
Moreover, the Canadian ecologist, who was a member of Greenpeace from 1971-86, admitted that Greenpeace intentionally used faulty computer models and scare tactics in promoting claims man-made gases are heating up the planet. More told the Senate committee that he decided to leave Greenpeace because it was more concerned with politics than it was with the environment............"
Leftists will never have the courage, or the honesty, or the integrity, or the ability to really say what their true intentions are. This means you, Soros. And you, Center for American Progress.
Some quotes from times past that accidentally slipped out but will never be admitted by the leftist environmentalists:
“No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment in a quote from the Calgary Herald
“Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” Tim Wirth , while U.S. Senator, Colorado. After a short stint as United Nations Under-Secretary for Global Affairs. Served as President, U.N. Foundation, created by Ted Turner and his $1 billion “gift”
“Man is always and everywhere a blight on the landscape.” John Muir, founder of the Sierra Club
“Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.” Dave Foreman, Earth First! and Sierra Club director (1995-1997)
“On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” Steven Schneider, Climatologist, Stanford University. Quoted in Discover, pp. 45-48, Oct. 1989; see also (Dixy Lee Ray in ‘Trashing the Planet’, 1990) and (American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996).
“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.” Paul Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich, “Population, Resources, Environment” (W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1970, 323) This quote has also been attributed to John Holdren, Erlich’s co-author, who now works with Obama in the White House.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.