It’s about the money, not the climate

goreworldBy Alan Caruba

Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), the Irish poet and dramatist, wrote “Pray don’t talk to me about the weather. Whenever people talk to me about the weather, I always feel quite certain that they mean something else.”

These days, when some world leader or politician speaks of the climate — the weather is what is happening right now wherever you are — they are not talking about sunshine or rain. They are talking about a devilishly obscene way of raising money by claiming that it is humans that are threatening the climate with everything they do, from turning on the lights to driving anywhere.

That’s why “global warming” was invented in the late 1980s as an immense threat to the Earth and to mankind. Never mind that Earth has routinely passed through warmer and cooler cycles for billions of years; much of which occurred before mankind emerged. And never mind that the Earth has been a distinct cooling cycle for the past seventeen years and likely to stay in it for a while. If the history of ice ages is any guide, we could literally be on the cusp of a new one.

If, however, a government can tax the use of energy, it stands to make a lot of money. That is why carbon taxes have been introduced in some nations and why the nearly useless “clean energy” options of wind and solar have been introduced even though they both require the backup of traditional coal, natural gas and nuclear energy plants because they cannot produce electricity if the wind isn’t blowing and the sun is obscured by clouds.

Taxing energy use means taxing “greenhouse gas” emissions; primarily carbon dioxide (CO2) so that every ton of it added to the atmosphere by a power plant and any other commercial activity becomes a source of income for the nation. The Australians went through this and rapidly discovered it drove up their cost of electricity and negatively affected their economy so much that they rid themselves of a prime minister and the tax within the past year.

Fortunately, every effort to introduce a carbon tax has been defeated by the U.S. Congress, but that it has shelled out billions for “climate research” over the years. That doesn’t mean, however, that 41 members of the House of Representatives haven’t gotten together in a “Safe Climate Caucus” led by Rep. Henry A. Waxman. The Washington Post reported that when it was launched in February 2013, the members promised to talk every day on the House floor about “the urgent need to address climate change.”

Check out the caucus and, if your Representative is a member, vote to replace him or her with someone less idiotic.

When you hear the President or a member of Congress talk about the climate, they are really talking about the scheme to generate revenue from it through taxation or to raise money from those who will personally benefit from any scheme related to the climate such as “clean energy.”

The need of governments to frighten their citizens about the climate in order to raise money is international in scope. A United States that has a $17 trillion debt is a prime example, much of it due to a government grown so large it wastes taxpayer’s money in the millions with every passing day whether it is sunny or rainy, warm or cold.

In late July, Reuters reported that Christine Lagarde, the chair of theInternational Monetary Fund, (IMF) opined in her new book that “energy taxes in much of the world are far below what they should be to reflect the harmful environmental and health impact of fossil fuels use.”

Please pay no attention to the billions of dollars that coal, oil and natural gas already generate for the nations in which they are found. Nations such as India and China are building coal-fired plants as fast as possible to provide the electricity every modern nation needs to expand its economy, provide more employment, and improve their citizen’s lives in every way imaginable.

“For the first time,” Reuters reported, “the IMF laid out exactly what it views as appropriate taxes on coal, natural gas, gasoline, and diesel in 156 countries to factor in the fuel’s overall costs, which include carbon dioxide emissions, air pollution, congestion and traffic accidents.” The problem with this is that the costs cited are bogus.

“Nations,” said Lagarde, “are now working on a United Nations deal for late 2015 to rein in greenhouse gas emissions that have hit repeated highs this century, but progress has been slow as nations fret about the impact any measures may have on economic growth.” As in bad impacts!

Ignore the claims that carbon dioxide affects the climate. Its role is so small it can barely be measured because CO2 represents 380 parts per million. When our primate ancestors began to climb down out of the trees, CO2 levels were about 1,000 parts per million. More CO2 means more crops, healthy growing forests, and all the other benefits that every form of vegetation provides. The breath we humans exhale contains about 4% of CO2.

The fact is that the United States and other nations are being run by politicians who are incapable of reducing spending or borrowing more in order to spend more. Venezuela just defaulted again on the payment of bonds it issued to raise money. They did this in 2001 and one must wonder why any financial institution purchases them.

There are eleven other nations whose credit ratings are flirting with big trouble. They include Greece, Ukraine, Pakistan, Cypress, and in the Americas Argentina, Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador and Belize. Borrowing by such nations is very expensive. A U.S. Treasury Note pays an annual coupon of just 2.5%, but the yields on 10-year bonds issue by Greece reached 29% in early 2012, just before it defaulted.

Adding to problems in the U.S. is the Obama agenda being acted upon by the Environmental Protection Agency whose “war on coal” has shuttered several hundred plants that produce the electricity needed to maintain the economy. In coal producing states this is playing havoc and it is driving up the cost of electricity in others.

The growth of oil and natural gas production in the U.S. is almost entirely on privately owned land as opposed to that controlled by the government. Supporting the attack on energy are the multi-million dollar environmental organizations like Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club.

The world has not warmed since the nineties and many factors influence the climate other than CO2, the Sun, the oceans, clouds, and volcanic activity. Nothing any government does, here and worldwide, has any meaningful impact on it, but if nations can demonize the use of energy and tax the CO2 it produces, they can generate more money to spend and waste.

The lies that governments, the United Nations, and the International Monetary Fund tell about the climate are about the money they can extract from citizens who must be kept frightened enough to pay taxes on their use of energy.

Alan Caruba, a Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) adjunct policy analyst, writes a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com .

  • pduffy

    You have shined the light of truth on the cockroaches of the left and their agenda. Too bad these cockroaches don’t scatter when the lights come on. No wonder they want to turn off the lights.

  • reggiec

    Energy control is the goal

    If you look closely every attempt by the left to control
    society eventually reverts to the control of the production and allocation of
    energy sources; which is necessary for the redistribution of wealth. (My side
    gets the energy; your side does not because you opposed my anti-capitalist
    ideology.) (Russia is threatening to cut off energy supplies to Europe if they oppose Russia’s attempts to expand)

    Fascism:

    A system of government marked by centralization of authority
    under a dictator (Or wanna be dictator), stringent socioeconomic controls,
    suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship and massive
    regulation of private business.

    If you attain the complete control over the production and
    allocation of energy you control EVERYTHING and EVERYONE.

    If you think that statement is too harsh; try to think of
    one single thing you do that does not require some input of energy you do not
    supply yourself. (Hard to identify something?) Now take it one step further.
    Try to identify who controls the energy you do use daily. In almost every case
    the government is gaining more and more control over the sources and allocation
    of energy in every respect.

    The whole “climate change” indoctrination program is to
    enable LEFTIST ideologues to totally control energy and in the process total
    control of the economy and society.

    Remember this Obama quote:

    “On issues that are important to us, we’re going to punish
    our enemies and reward our friends”

    You can bet the Obama administrations out of control EPA
    will be actively rewarding the allocation of energy on the bases of identifying
    enemies and friends.

  • marlene crumley

    The anti-gun nuts say the NRA uses fear to halt any “common sense” gun laws. The liberal tree-huggers (actually they are destroyers) are doing the same thing with their climate control agenda.

  • LovesFreedom

    Precisely reggiec! Great comment(s)! Yep, some of us live in reality and realized immediately that “global
    warming” (aka “climate change”) was a big pile of steaming dung. The libturd leftists regularly
    like to disguise the real agenda they want to accomplish…akin to
    ‘smoke and mirrors’ tactics. Then tax us for all of it while they bask
    in their ‘glory.’ What a sick bunch of greedy, power-hungry, hateful, non-American egotists. God help America

Back to top

Copyright © 2008-2014 NetRight Daily