U.S. Companies Ignore Trump On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach December 1, 2017 – 3:25 pm

Interestingly, Trump doesn’t care. Have you ever heard him complain about cities, states, U.S. companies, or citizens practicing Hotcoldwetdry measures within their own “lives”? He only really cares that the U.S. government not burden its citizens with Hotcoldwetdry legislation, taxes/fees, and regulations

(UK Guardian) Since taking office, Donald Trump has pulled the United States out of the Paris climate agreement, rolled back numerous protections against environmental pollution and espoused coal as the fuel of the future, all in the name of job creation and ending what he sees as the “theft of American prosperity”.

Yet the big businesses he claims to champion are increasingly choosing to ignore the US president’s sceptical stance on climate change and press ahead towards their own environmental goals without him.

Several of the country’s corporate giants, including Walmart, General Motors, Ford and Mars, appeared this week at the second annual Companies v Climate Change conference in Miami to showcase their progress and reinforce their belief that sustainability and other green targets can be achieved irrespective of the policies and purpose of the White House.

He never asked them to stop. But, hey, how about GM and Ford give up producing fossil fueled vehicles? If they really care, you know. And WalMart can stop bringing in products from overseas that come on fossil fueled ships and transported by fossil fueled 18 wheelers? If they want to (pretend) to care about the climate scam, they’re welcome to do it. This is what’s called “free choice.”

For Jason Youner, chief executive and founder of Companies v Climate Change, it is further proof that green-thinking American businesses are filling the environmental void created by the Trump administration’s cynicism.

“The corporate sector is not paying heed to the president’s agenda. They’re making all kinds of commitments and they’re putting all kinds of policies in place and changing the way they operate and do business and making a lot of improvements,” he said.

Actually, they are. The agenda is that if people and private entities want to Do Something on their own, go for it. These same companies would pitch a fit if the Government forced them to Do Something.

Read: U.S. Companies Ignore Trump On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | Comments Off on U.S. Companies Ignore Trump On ‘Climate Change’ Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 1, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is heat snow due to your neighbors not being charged carbon taxes, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on a Fat Activist Bisexual Queer finding men exhausting.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Power Of Director Of CFPB “Really Should Frighten People”

By William Teach December 1, 2017 – 10:53 am

Nothing like giving unelected bureaucrats massive power that is unchecked by the duly elected lawmakers

(The Hill) White House budget chief Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that the authority wielded by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) chief “should frighten people” days after he assumed the role of acting director.

Mulvaney, who also serves as the director of Office of Management and Budget, said on Fox Business Network’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that the structure of the CFPB is “fundamentally flawed” and that his directive as its administrator would be to “limit” the agency’s effect on capitalism.

“The structure of the CFPB is just fundamentally flawed. Authority that I have now as the acting director really should frighten people,” Mulvaney said.

“You can sit down in a room with three or four people, and say, well, let’s go off and do this, and there is no accountability to Congress. I could set the budget pretty much without any input from Congress, in fact, without any input from Congress,” he added.

And the Democrats who designed this intentionally made it so. Remember, only two Republicans, Collins and Brown, voted for Dodd-Frank in the Senate. No Democrats voted against. In the House, 3 Republicans said yea, only 19 Democrats said no. So this was pretty much an utterly partisan piece of legislation. Of course, Democrats love the notion of another massive federal government agency which has virtually no controls placed upon it by anyone, especially those stupid citizens. Well, right up to it bones them personally.

It would be funny as hell if Trump and Mulvaney used to power of the CFPB to go full bore after Democrat party supporting companies, wouldn’t it? Teach them a lesson in “things can backfire badly”? From a hypothetical point of view, though.

Read: Power Of Director Of CFPB “Really Should Frighten People” »

Posted in Government | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Earthquake Hits Delaware: You Know What This Means, Right?

By William Teach December 1, 2017 – 7:11 am

So this happened Thursday afternoon

There’s been some confusion in terms of actual power. It was originally reported as a 5.1, then seemed to be downgraded to 4.4, then the USGS makes it a 4.1. Regardless doesn’t matter, because it’s your fault for driving a fossil fueled vehicle, using a hair dryer, and not growing your own food while giving up meat

https://twitter.com/_shybree/status/936380196051185664

Read More »

Read: Earthquake Hits Delaware: You Know What This Means, Right? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Journalism: Trump Tells Confidants That Government Shutdown Would Be Good For Him Or Something

By William Teach December 1, 2017 – 6:45 am

Every day there seems to be a negative story on President Trump that offers nothing but unknown, unnamed, anonymous sources. In an age where the media is part and parcel of the #Resistance, where they are even more unhinged and opposed to a sitting Republican president, how can we take the media seriously? How can we possibly trust this?

Trump tells confidants that a government shutdown might be good for him

President Trump has told confidants that a government shutdown could be good for him politically and is focusing on his hard-line immigration stance as a way to win back supporters unhappy with his outreach to Democrats this fall, according to people who have spoken with him recently.

Over the past 10 days, the president has also told advisers that it is important that he is seen as tough on immigration and getting money for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to two people who have spoken with him. He has asked friends about how a shutdown would affect him politically and has told several people he would put the blame on Democrats. (snip)

But the more Trump talked to advisers, read polls and watched developments on Capitol Hill, the more he became frustrated that he was “looking like the chump in the deal,” according to one person who spoke to him about the issue, who along with others insisted on anonymity to speak candidly. This time, Trump wants his political base to see him as winning the contest, two advisers said.

The article veers into this and that and the other, but, the basic substance is about Trump thinking that a shutdown would help him out, yet offers zero evidence. In fact, we get evidence to the contrary

White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short and other aides said the president did not want a shutdown.

“He’s not advocating for a shutdown in any way. We want to make sure our military is funded. We want to make sure our priorities are funded. That’s why we invited [Democrats] over to have a conversation about a deal,” Short told reporters at the U.S. Capitol late Thursday.

So, the only person on the record refutes the entire premise of the story. This is the worst of click-bait journalism.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Journalism: Trump Tells Confidants That Government Shutdown Would Be Good For Him Or Something »

Posted in Donald Trump, Journalistic Malpractice | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Change Is Coming For Your Shopping Cart Or Something

By William Teach November 30, 2017 – 5:01 pm

However, they aren’t talking about ‘climate change’ taxes/fees coming for your shopping cart, which is what the Cult of Climastrology is actually attempting to make happen

(Bloomberg) Every other week, hosts Jenny Kaplan and Lindsey Rupp guide you through the consumer universe, breaking down what’s going on with all the things people buy.

The impact of climate change on the things we buy is already noticeable, but it’s bound to get worse. In future decades, the food we eat, beverages we drink and clothes we wear may all be altered by the warming planet. In the second of two episodes about climate change, Jenny and Lindsey dig into the future impact of global warming on shoppers. They talk with Andrea Illy, Chief Executive Officer of IllyCaffe; Dr. Peter Howard, economics director at the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University’s School of Law; and Cecilia Strömblad Brännsten, a sustainability business expert at H&M.

You’re welcome to listen to this bit of scaremongering, but, it’s exactly what you expect: doom doom doom, all in the future, and with absolutely zero evidence to back their prognostications.

Read: Climate Change Is Coming For Your Shopping Cart Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 30, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is snow that will soon never be seen again due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on the misogynist war on FLOTUS.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Philly Leftists Look To Outlaw Bullet Proof Glass

By William Teach November 30, 2017 – 10:51 am

Stores have long taken a page from banks in using bullet proof glass (not actually glass nowadays. It’s typically thick acrylic or plexiglass) to protect their employees from people looking to do Bad Things. They also put many items behind this same protection. Baltimore is a hotbed of this. Over to Philly

(Fox29) A controversial bill is currently working its way through city hall designed to regulate ‘stop and go’ liquor stores. One part of the bill would force business owners to take down bulletproof glass inside their stores. But at what cost to their safety?

Broad Deli sits on the corner of the 2200 block of North Broad, inside a wall of bulletproof glass separates customers from workers.

“The most important thing is safety and the public’s safety,” owner Rich Kim said.

Now, if you look at the story at PhillyMag, you learn that many of these places, called stop-and-gos, are not particularly reputable. Back to Fox29

A bill moving through city council reads: “No establishment shall erect or maintain a physical barrier.”

It’s called the ‘Stop and Go’ bill and is being offered by city councilwoman Cindy Bass.

“Right now, the plexiglass has to come down,” she said.

If you watch the attached video, as The Blaze did, we also learn part of her reasoning

“We want to make sure that there isn’t this sort of indignity, in my opinion, to serving food through a plexiglass only in certain neighborhoods,” Bass told the station.

So, she’s cool with putting the workers at the stores in more danger just because someone feelings might be hurt. I wonder if she has considered that there’s a reason for the bulletproof protection

Bass said stores could install more security cameras and use security guards in place of the bulletproof glass, the station said.

Oh, sure, right, just spend more money on cameras (which most probably already have) and security guards! Will they be allowed to be armed? Philly is pretty tight on owning firearms. Apparently she is aware of the danger. Liberals.

Read: Philly Leftists Look To Outlaw Bullet Proof Glass »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Liberal World | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

We Should Totally Be Grown Ups And Implement A “Bipartisan” Carbon Tax Or Something

By William Teach November 30, 2017 – 7:58 am

The Greensboro News and Record runs a “letter” that is actually shilling for a far left climate group

Let’s be grown-ups about climate change

It’s time for us to talk about climate change like adults. Anthropogenic climate change is a reality. Ninety-seven percent or more of climate scientists agree that climate warming over the last century is “extremely likely due to human activities” (NASA, 2017).

If we want to “be grown-ups”, should we be starting with a lie? The 97% consensus thing has been utterly debunked, and the NASA version goes back to the Cook et all version. Which is a lie. Is this an adult conversation?

Average global temperature has increased by about 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit over the past 100 years. The sea level is rising, and some types of extreme weather — such as heat waves and heavy precipitation events — are happening more frequently (AAAS Climate Science Panel, 2014). This is a mounting issue that will impact every political and economic topic, from immigration to disaster recovery funding.

A 1.4F increase since 1850 (notice that writer Sam Shanty uses the wrong time frame) is not much, and wholly within what would be expected during a Holocene warm period. Then we get the lies about extreme weather. Regardless, what’s the whole point of this “letter”

Now it is our job, as engaged citizens in a democracy, to show our representatives that we want to take action. A carbon fee and dividend is the most bipartisan, logical and efficient means for incentivizing change in consumer behaviors without hiking up prices. For more information on the carbon fee and dividend plan, visit www.citizensclimatelobby.org.

That’s right, to pimp a carbon tax, one which would make people more reliant on government as they give people some money, like dad with an allowance, to offset the high cost of living increases the taxes would cause, while at the same time having the government use their power to force change in the way we live. This is what they call “science”. Even if the climate has changed mostly/solely due to Mankind’s activities, you get a sense that Warmists really do not want to fix it, they want to use it for their Progressive/Marxist/Statist/whatever you want to call it Big Government purposes.

Read: We Should Totally Be Grown Ups And Implement A “Bipartisan” Carbon Tax Or Something »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming, Progressive Goals | 25 Comments | Trackback URL

New Liberal Idea: Federal Government Would Create A Social Wealth Fund

By William Teach November 30, 2017 – 7:32 am

The opinion pages of the NY Times are always a wealth of hardcore leftism, where new ideas are trotted out. We have this one by Matt Gruening, which would transform private wealth into public wealth

What if Everyone Benefitted When Stocks Soared?

…

The solution is simpler than it seems. There’s a tried and tested way, within the system we have now, of giving everyone a share in the investment returns now hoarded by the wealthy. It’s called a social wealth fund, a pool of investment assets in some ways like the giant index or mutual funds already popular with retirement savings accounts or pension funds, but one owned collectively by society as a whole. One that paid dividends not to the few, or even just to the shrinking middle class lucky enough to have their savings invested, but to everyone.

It may be our best chance to stop a decades-long trend of rising wealth inequality that has only accelerated since the Great Recession. According to new data released by the Federal Reserve, the collapse of the housing bubble and the ensuing financial crisis caused the net worth of virtually all families, rich and poor, to drop sharply between 2007 and 2010. But during the post-2010 economic recovery, the fortunes of the wealthiest grew rapidly while nearly everyone else’s lagged behind.

That’s weird. We were told during the Obama years that the stock market doing well was super awesome, and all thanks to Obama. Now we’re told a great stock market isn’t. Oh, and that income inequality (meaning class envy) got much, much worse during the Obama years. In fact, it’s the worst its been since they started measuring it in 1983.

Here’s how it could work. The federal government would create and run a new investment fund, and issue every adult citizen one share of ownership. The fund would gradually come to own a substantial and diverse portfolio of stocks, bonds and real estate. The investment return that the fund generates would be paid out to each citizen in the form of a universal basic dividend, and the shares would be nontransferable to preserve the institution’s egalitarian purpose.

Yes, because the federal government does a great job in using the People’s Money, taken forcibly, wisely, eh?

The net result of such a system would be to gradually transform private wealth, which is very unevenly distributed, into public wealth that every person in society owns an equal part of. If, over time, the social wealth fund came to own one-third of the country’s wealth…

In other words, this is just another idea to put all the wealth in the hands of Government, which would dole out said money like a parent giving an allowance, all while making citizens even more reliant on Government.

Where would the money come from?

Wouldn’t the enormous wealth that our increasingly productive society is generating, which now flows into just a few pockets, be a fair source? Some of the concrete ways this could happen are through the transfer of existing federal assets like land, buildings and portions of the wireless spectrum into the new fund. Other measures could include increases in taxes on capital that affect mostly the wealthy such as estate, dividend and financial transaction taxes and the creation of a new type of corporate tax that requires companies to directly issue new shares to the social wealth fund on an annual basis and during certain corporate moves such as initial public offerings, mergers and acquisitions.

So, a Robin Hood tax. Typical leftist redistribution of wealth. Another idea is for the Federal Reserve to buy stock for the fund instead of treasury bonds. One has to wonder why Leftists, who are controlled by moneyed people like George Soros, Thom Steyer, Hollywood, etc, are so invested in this whole income inequality thing. And why they’re always looking for ways to tear down successful people in a manner than would make citizens more reliant on government.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: New Liberal Idea: Federal Government Would Create A Social Wealth Fund »

Posted in Liberal World, Progressive Goals | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove