Posted on 11/20/2017 6:59:24 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Even casual readers of the news know that the earth is probably going to look very different in 2100, and not in a good way. [snip]
The real culprit of the climate crisis is not any particular form of consumption, production or regulation but rather the very way in which we globally produce, which is for profit rather than for sustainability. So long as this order is in place, the crisis will continue and, given its progressive nature, worsen. This is a hard fact to confront. But averting our eyes from a seemingly intractable problem does not make it any less a problem. It should be stated plainly: It’s capitalism that is at fault.
As an increasing number of environmental groups are emphasizing, it’s systemic change or bust. From a political standpoint, something interesting has occurred here: Climate change has made anticapitalist struggle, for the first time in history, a non-class-based issue.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
If they hate capitalism, they are free to redistribute their wealth or leave for another country.
Fattening the Golden Calf before the Marxist slaughter has always been an implicit feature of commie idiotology.
What fun would it be to take over the farmhouse if the whiskey cabinet was empty and there were no beds to sleep in... wif or wifout sheets?
Garbage.
Take the time to “follow the money” on how the climate alarmists propose to “solve” climate change and it is scary.
Carbon “emitters”, as determined by government, must pay for carbon credits, as managed by Wall Street. The funds for said credits go to third world hands who supposedly plant enough trees to balance out the carbon.
It is a system designed for greed, obscene profits and corruption where everyone including the tree planter, takes a hefty cut.
No the problem is population
Shallow, superficial thinking is symptomatic of environmentalism and so-called sustainability. Capitalism requires genuine sustainability. Responsible capitalism (the only kind that works) protects the source of raw materials.
Environmentalist wackos define capitalism as any means of production not controlled by the state. Rape and plunder is not capitalism. It is rape and plunder. Capitalism is not sustainable with rape and plunder as a model. Capitalism is a system of production. It is not simply the abandonment of all sense in the drive to get something.
Destroying the rain forests of Brazil with mercury poisoning as a means of extracting gold is not sustainable. It kills the laborer, destroys the rivers, kills the wildlife and toxifies the environment. It is not a sustainable means of production. It is not a capitalist means of production.
They are called Watermelons
Green on the outside, red on the inside.
“The list goes on and on. The New Jersey chemical swamps, the Athabasca Oil Sands, and the other, aforementioned North American places and incidents pale by comparison.”
You must not have driven through California lately. Take a cruise through the mojave, or the sonora, or the imperial valley, or many places in the coastal range. Literally thousands of square miles permanently destroyed by seas of solar panels, and jungles of windmills in the hundreds, hundreds of feet high, sitting on bases of concrete and killing birds. This is by far the greatest crime against humanity ever perpetuated, and yet nobody seems to care, they are so obssesed that the atmosphere gas 4 molecules CO2 for every 10000. Truly an epic crime against the planet
There’s one thing that will almost certainly
* make production more efficient
* make better use of land
* make more efficient use of resources
* make common people’s lives better
That one thing is to “let people get rich”. They have to be allowed to get rich off their ideas, not government money (which will run out before Musk solves all world problems) The first 3 things will make wealth for those who implement the best ideas and will result in the 4th.
The one thing most likely to stop or slow any of those goals is to “get government involved”. Even deciding who makes money (Musk) or how (which technology), will stop many potential solutions while letting the government choose one that is likely not the best.
Governments get excited about single-digit percentage improvement and encourage those with low-risk efforts that are guaranteed to “show progress”. Entrepreneurs get excited about orders of magnitude improvements and accept they will fail often. Greenie goals need orders of magnitude progress.
I always take my scientific advice from a PhD in religion....not.
Environmentalists have been watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) for a very long time.
Real environmentalists would be for nuclear power and against massive immigration.
For leftists, the issue is never the issue. The issue is always how they can seize power.
The “climate change” propaganda is one of their best selling schemes yet.
All true, but what this article is actually promoting is a totalitarian government. Communism will lead to this, as it always has, but the real manner the “save the world” intelligentsia want to use is to take complete power with the ability to define everything that people do and have.
So it is a power grab, and always has been.
The interesting thing about the Figueres quote is that - even as a top UN “climate official” - she is basically admitting that the basic agenda of the climate lobby is about macro-economics, not “climate control.” “Climate change” is just the gun at your head to force you to comply by giving up your freedoms, money, and prosperity. But the masters will keep theirs.
Leftist get everything wrong. You can sue a privately owned power plant. You cannot sue one owned by the North Korean or Chinese communist governmemts.
Soylent Green
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.