Say, How Do We Pay For “Climate Change” Safety?

By completely changing the financial systems of the world, of course!

(SMH) The purpose of the global financial system is to allocate the world’s savings to their most productive uses. When the system works properly, these savings are channeled into investments that raise living standards; when it malfunctions, as in recent years, savings are channeled into real-estate bubbles and environmentally harmful projects, including those that exacerbate human-induced climate change.

Notice how Warmist Jeffrey Sachs writes about the financial system as if it were meant to redistribute wealth.

The year 2015 will be a turning point in the effort to create a global financial system that contributes to climate safety rather than climate ruin. In July, the world’s governments will meet in Addis Ababa to hammer out a new framework for global finance.

The meeting’s goal will be to facilitate a financial system that supports sustainable development, meaning economic growth that is socially inclusive and environmentally sound. Five months later, in Paris, the world’s governments will sign a new global agreement to control human-induced climate change and channel funds toward climate-safe energy, building on the progress achieved earlier this month in negotiations in Lima, Peru. There, too, finance will loom large.

Let’s put that in plain language: Warmists, and governments, want to transform the world financial system away from capitalism (which, no, is not perfect) toward a Progressive/socialist type system, one which is controlled lock, stock, and barrel by Government. Which would mandate what economic sectors and activity Is Allowed. Along with lots of “carbon taxes”.

Both Big Oil and Big Finance have made major mistakes in recent years, channeling funds into socially destructive investments. In 2015, these two powerful industries, and the world as a whole, can start to put things right. We have within our reach the makings of a new global financial system that directs savings where they are urgently needed: sustainable development and climate safety, for ourselves and for future generations.

More and more Warmists are coming out of the closet in stating their actual goals, which is the destruction of capitalism. Despite the fact that far left economic policies have failed time and time again. But, they do not care. This is about control.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Say, How Do We Pay For “Climate Change” Safety?”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Capitalism requires regulation. As human beings we can create policies that encourage investments for good. We already do it. We regulate women selling their bodies for sex, people selling organs for transplant, leasing your backyard for radioactive waste, we discourage investment in crack cocaine and heroin – we have favorable tax policies for charitable giving. Clearly we should discourage investments that favor burning fossil fuels and encourage investments in the long-term health of the planet and we humans. Clearly we should discourage non-productive investments into asset bubbles. For example, the housing bubble benefitted the lenders and bankers (and any home buyers who “got out” with their profits before the bubble burst), but took trillions of value out of homeowners pockets. Smart economists saw this happening.

    Teach typed:

    Warmists, and governments, want to transform the world financial system away from capitalism (which, no, is not perfect) toward a Progressive/socialist type system, one which is controlled lock, stock, and barrel by Government. Which would mandate what economic sectors and activity Is Allowed. Along with lots of “carbon taxes”.

    This is just not true. Yes, we should all want to transform the world financial system away from deleterious investments. No, that does not eliminate capitalism. Carbon should be taxed at a rate commensurate with the societal costs of its major pollutant, CO2.

    Climate safety requires that all countries shift their energy systems away from coal, oil, and gas, toward wind, solar, geothermal, and other low-carbon sources. We should also test the feasibility of large-scale carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), which might enable the safe, long-term use of at least some fossil fuels. Instead, the global financial system has continued to pump hundreds of billions of dollars per year into exploring and developing new fossil-fuel reserves, while directing very little toward CCS.

    And with oil prices plummeting, many of those investments will lose money.

    As more countries and companies introduce carbon pricing, the internal accounting cost of carbon emissions will rise, investments in fossil fuels will become less attractive, and investments in low-carbon energy systems will become more appealing. The market signals of CO2 taxation (or the cost of CO2 emission permits) will help investors and money managers steer clear of new fossil-fuel investments. Carbon taxes also offer governments a crucial source of revenue for future investment in low-carbon energy.

    Why shouldn’t the cost of fossil fuel use include the costs of the damage their use causes? I understand why coal, oil and gas industries oppose this pricing, but it seems the fair thing to do. Why put all the burden onto taxpayers?

    Why shouldn’t we make global investments in non-fossil fuel energy sources?

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/how-to-pay-for-climate-safety-20141230-12fcrs.html#ixzz3NPceJSi7

  2. john says:

    More and more coldists are coming out of the closet and stating that they really just don’t care about any climate change because the main victims will be non white people who they see as a drag on the world capitalistic system
    Coldists climate change deniers have been swelling the ranks of the KKK and American Nazi movements here in North America while in Europe and Russia neo Nazis often carry denial banners
    Many on the rabid radical right are paranoid about government and the ability of their fellow citizens to choose a good government that will not make the heads of paranoid people explode who are not wearing their tin foil hats
    The Pope will soon be coming out with an encyclical on climate change that and the mid january announcement of 2014 planet in a fever should really set you off

  3. Hoss says:

    Ah, the lefties and their eternal yearnings for control under the guise of knowing what’s best for everyone. Just follow the tenets of leftist fundamentalism and you can live a life 5 levels below your current standard of living knowing it’s for the common good (or whatever hokum the left is selling this week).

    And seriously, Jeffery, you’re using the banning of prostitution as a means of controlling capitalism? That’s not controlling capitalism, that’s controlling people. Who’s fucking business is it if a strong woman is willing to sell sex to anyone else for an agreed upon price, and I also don’t have a problem with someone selling their organs (leasing your backyard for radioactive wastes is just an assinine example).

Bad Behavior has blocked 6137 access attempts in the last 7 days.