As typical, Warmists don’t seem to understand how this whole capitalism and free market thing works. Well, maybe that’s not fair: they understand, and they want to destroy them in favor of government running everything. While failing to understand that when government is picking winners and losers, we all end up losers in the end
WSW: Climate Change, Capitalism And The Government’s Role
Journalist and author Christian Parenti says what American capitalism needs is a new round of “creative destruction†and investment. He says making those investments in renewable energy would help the economy and mitigate the impact of climate change.
Parenti, who also teaches in the Economics Department for John Jay College at City University of New York will speak at Western Michigan University on Thursday November 2nd at 7:00 in Knauss Hall.
Parenti says the high rates of economic growth in the 1950’s were largely caused by post World War II rebuilding. He says now the government needs to replace the fossil fuel industry with a clean energy infrastructure.
Well, that’s interesting. He wants to do away with the very thing that allows him to go to Michigan from New York. Does anyone remotely think he’s planning on walking or riding a bicycle?
Despite talk of a “free marketâ€, Parenti says in reality the U.S. has developed a mixed economy with government influence in many sectors. He says the federal government could end drilling for oil and coal mining on public land, and subsidies for fossil fuels. Parenti says the government also has influence by what it purchases. He says a carbon tax would help, and while Congress isn’t likely to enact one anytime soon, Parentis says a de facto carbon tax could be enacted now through the federal Clean Air Act. He says fines on businesses for burning fossil fuels would serve as an incentive to develop sustainable energy.
There it is in a nutshell: Government control. Warmists love this stuff.
Interestingly, another article that I ran across discusses how Congress should be passing this stuff, rather than regulations that often really aren’t authorized by legislation, like the CAA.
With major global implications at stake, shouldn’t our nation’s climate policy be discussed, debated and acted upon in Congress, as opposed to being left to an unelected bureaucracy to apply an outdated law? While climate change itself is considered a settled matter, how our nation responds is anything but settled.
It’s settled, you guys! If that was the case, why are we still discussing it decades later?
What has become abundantly clear is that there is widespread disagreement in Congress, the Supreme Court and now two successive administrations in how to address climate change. Given its global impact, these types of monumental decisions need to be made in the halls of Congress as the elected body to identify, discuss and act as representatives of the people.
Guess it’s not settled. Anyhow, as you can guess, this piece is also about enabling Government to take control. Funny how it always comes down to this from Warmists, eh?
