Just to be clear, he does believe in global warming, but thinks that the Cap and Trade legislation will destroy the US economy.
He added, “If the US passed a cap and trade and other countries did not, it wouldn’t work. It would ruin the US economy and it wouldn’t save the climate either. So this is a global issue, the global climate statistics are global in nature, global carbon emissions are global in nature, and we really have to have an international consensus of what to do. That is going to stretch our international diplomacy to its limit, there’s no doubt about that.”
#3 – Father,
Excellent point.
#4 – Chuck,
It could be done by attrition.
http://vhemt.org/
#12 – srgothard,
How about you reduce the number of your children and leave the rest of us to decide for our own lives?
How about if we at least stop giving people tax incentives for breeding like rats? Remember, a tax cut for one person is a tax increase on everyone who doesn’t get it. Someone has to make up the difference.
How about if we increase worldwide access to birth control so that at least the many millions who want it can have access to it? Would you be against providing freedom NOT to breed?
@ Misanthropic Scott
The countries with birthrate problems are the third world countries like some parts of Asia, most of Africa and the Middle East.
#1 Please explain how tax incentives in the USA solves this.
And with the birthrate of US citizens at about 2.0% (stable population), 100% of the population growth in the United States is net immigration.
#2 Please explain how tax incentives to lower domestic birthrates will stop net immigration.
Your supposed solution wouldn’t even address a problem.
#20, And where is government going to get it’s revenue from when all the “dirty” corps are out of business or no longer need to buy these credits?
The greens corps.
Don’t fool yourself into thinking this was an altruistic endeavor. It’s greed, pure and simple.
@ Misanthropic Scott Part 2
There are only 3 universal factors that identify patterns in birthrate:
1. Education level
2. The presence of democracy
3. The presence of women’s rights
In countries with education, democracy and women’s rights … birthrates are very low.
In countries without any of these factors, birthrates are very high.
#3 Please explain how providing birth control access to women in countries without education, without democracy and without women’s rights is going to work and provide one success story country.
pedro,
Your headline is bull as is the editorial you add. But then, bullshit has been your hallmark.
He is NOT a Nobel Prize winner. He, along with 619 others compiled and authored a report that shared the Nobel prize with Al Gore. Since his name doesn’t appear among the Lead Authors, I can only assume his contribution to the report was minor.
Be that as it may, Dr. Running is a fervent believer in “global warming” and lectures on it quite often. As Misanthropic Scott points out, he believes that the solution to global warming must be global in nature.
The only scam here is what you are attempting.
#25, Hmeyers,
#3 Please explain how providing birth control access to women in countries without education, without democracy and without women’s rights is going to work and provide one success story country.
China.
Because they realized that they couldn’t feed/house/employ everyone at the rate of growth they experienced. While China’s population has continued to grow, it is much less than if no actions were taken.
@ Fusion
We didn’t provide birth control to China to cause this to happen.
The police state mandated it.
Now if you want to argue someone should pay the third world governments to do the police state/mandate one-child thing I’m all ears.
HMeyers,
The tax incentives for births in this country likely are having a small effect now and are highly immoral given the world population.
You may note that in my second paragraph, I said to increase worldwide access to birth control.
As for your three factors, that is mostly true. However, none of them explain why the wealthiest nation in the world, the U.S., has the highest birthrate in the developed democratic world.
I think you may have left out religiosity or some other form of irrationality that gives the U.S. the only birthrate above replacement among developed democratic nations.
@ MS
You are going to hate this and the implications, but so be it …
Average effective education level is a function of education plus population density. This is why people in, say, New York city are very educated compared to, say, some little town in Montana.
The United States has a very low population density, think of the red states and rural areas.
So in this paradox, the highest effective education levels are attained with HIGH population densities.
Which is the thing you hate, hehe.
@MS
In summary, the US has one of the highest birthrates in the West (Israel surpasses the USA, Sweden is very close) because of the low population density which makes the USA trail in effective education level.
And education level is factor #1 in birthrate.
Game. Set. Match.
HMeyers,
Actually, I hate high population, not high population density. People should live stacked on top of each other. It’s more cost effective and less damaging on the land. We can’t support billions of humans no matter what we do. But, we can support a hell of a lot more by stacking people on top of each other.
We also trail other countries in education because we have no national standards for education.
Further, a lot of people even in NYC do not have the education level of the average European. So, not just density, but standards. And, a standard level of spending per child nationally wouldn’t be bad either. Are only children of wealthy families worthy of a proper education? Certainly only children in relatively well off areas are getting adequate spending on education. The results are obvious.
He is right, it will ruin the economy.
But that is what leftist feel we deserve, a ruined economy, to repay the world for our past sins…
But the only sins I see in the past, were those done by leftists…Hitler, Stalin, Fidel, Mao, etc.
#32, We also trail other countries in education because we have no national standards for education.
Luckily, the federal gov doesn’t have the authority to do that as per the 10th Amendment.
As more people are realizing, the fed gov is taking way to much liberty with OUR liberties.
We are a Republic, not a democracy, not a technocracy, not bureau. The rules for governing this Republic are spelled out in the Constitution.
If you are that concerned with public education standards, you should look at your state, not mine.
Are only children of wealthy families worthy of a proper education? Certainly only children in relatively well off areas are getting adequate spending on education.
Vouchers. Instead of creating another fed gov bureaucracy, just give parents a choice instead of mandate. When low performing public schools find their students disappearing, they will have to compete by actually producing something — like qualified graduates.
Erm… What part of “If… Then…” did you intentionally misplace so you could write that headline?
#34 – LL,
C’mon, you can’t really be so much for strong government that you think that education should be completely privatized, can you? Who will decide the curriculum? Will you be looking forward to a future like that described in the movie Idiocracy where law degrees are given out at costco?
Vouchers are the surest way to guarantee that public education will go out of business … to be replaced mostly by religious indoctrination. That won’t be good for anyone.
#36 – Me (correction)
Oops, I meant small government, not strong government.
Yes there are many reasons why cap and trade are wrong,
whether or not you believe that emissions should be lowered
Emission Trading (Cap and Trade)
Basic Idea — Offsets — Tree Planting — Manufacture Shift — Fair Trade — Surreal Market — Allowances: Auctions + Hand-Outs — Allowance Trading — Companies: Business Stability + Cost — In Conclusion
As it happens,
if there is to be an emission policy,
Electricity and Transport sectors alone (80% of emissions) are sufficient to meet emission reduction targets,
with measures advantageous in themselves (including energy renewability, and that emissions contain much else, whatever about CO2),
long term funded for reduced consumer price impact,
without efficiency regulation, industrial carbon taxes or cap and trade schemes
ceolas.net/#cc1x
.
#36, Actually, I am. I would not send my kid to a school that wouldn’t prepare him for a successful future.
And I don’t know any parents who would.
How many do you know who would send their kid to a school that taught underwater basket weaving vs. electronics repair or chemistry or computer science?
Vouchers are the surest way to guarantee that public education will go out of business
Public education isn’t a business. If it was, we would be better off (assuming it wasn’t regulated to death).
I keep hearing from you guys how a public health option would be no worse than the current private solution. How much worse could a private education solution be? Let’s try it out. If it doesn’t work, the public schools will thrive.
All cap and trade will do is move pollution to poor neighborhoods. That’s the whole point anyway, rich people don’t want smokestacks visible from their private compounds.