‘Climate Change’ Means People Will Have To Give Up Private Ownership Of Homes Or Something

By William Teach July 14, 2017 – 5:23 pm

But, no, remember, this is all about science” (via Watts Up With That?)

Can property survive the great climate transition?

As we become an increasingly urban species, urban resilience is emerging as a big deal. The idea is generating a lot of noise about how to develop or retrofit cities that can deal with the many challenges before us, or consume less energy in the transition to post-carbon economies.

There is ample activity aimed at making this happen, including through designing and building ecocities, and calls such as that of the Transition Towns movement, which suggests substantial changes to our ways of life might be both necessary and inevitable.

In all of this, very little has been said about the elephant in the urban living room – property. Property systems are the codification of our relationship to place and the way in which many of us make a claim to place, including a roof over our heads.

If our cities are to become more resilient and sustainable, our systems of property need to come along for the ride.

And what is the ride?

Western systems of property law assume property is delineated and static: the property holder has invested (often substantial) financial resources to secure a claim to that neatly identified parcel of land and/or buildings. Further, the property owner expects to make a nice economic return on their parcel.

Unfortunately, the future doesn’t look neatly delineated or static. Many researchers and practitioners tell us the future might not look like anything we’ve ever seen. Some say we are reaching a tipping point, after which the rules we have constructed will no longer apply or be of use. (snip)

Living in colonised landscapes tells us it might be time to rethink which way around the “ownership” dynamic works in property relationships.

That is, if we are to think about and create property systems that are as dynamic as the landscapes we occupy, we might need to start thinking about ourselves as belonging to and answerable to the land, not the other way around.

Follow this to the logical conclusion: the government would have all claim to property, and people would be allowed to live in places that government dictates. Because science.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ Means People Will Have To Give Up Private Ownership Of Homes Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 14, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful carbon neutral bike, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on the news smearing a Christian group that believes in the 1st Amendment.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

California Gov. Brown: Fate Of Humanity Rests On His Climate Plan

By William Teach July 14, 2017 – 10:51 am

No sort of narcissism involved here at all

Gov. Jerry Brown says the existence of humanity rests on his climate change deal

Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday cast his new plan to fight climate change as essential to the fate of American democracy — and humanity itself.

“America is facing not just a climate crisis with the rest of the world, we are facing a political crisis,” Brown told lawmakers at the first public hearing on his proposal to reduce the state’s carbon emissions. “Can democracy actually work? Is there a sufficient consensus that we can govern ourselves? That, I submit to you, is an open question.”

Read: California Gov. Brown: Fate Of Humanity Rests On His Climate Plan »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Senate Republicans Exempt Themselves From The Non-Repeal/Replace Bill

By William Teach July 14, 2017 – 7:27 am

Vox’s Sara Kliff thinks she has caught out Senate Republicans doing something nefarious. What’s she has unintentionally pointed out is worse, at least for those who have been voting Republican

Senate Republicans exempt own health coverage from part of latest proposal

Senate Republicans included a provision that exempts members of Congress and their staff from part of their latest health care plan.

This exemption could have the effect of ensuring that members of Congress have coverage for a wider array of benefits than other Americans who purchase their own coverage.

A Senate Republican aide confirmed that the exemption existed but was unable to comment as to the specific effect it would have. The aide said it was included to ensure that the bill hewed to the chamber’s strict reconciliation rules that limit the policies this health bill can include.

The exemption is similar to the one that existed in the House health bill. After Vox reported on its existence, the House voted to close the loophole — and the Senate aide expected their chamber to follow the same path.

I’m really not seeing the big problem: all these bills do is require that Congressional health plans have lots and lots of coverage, much as private employers do, while allowing citizens and private entities to obtain plans with lower coverage. But, really, this is not the point: here’s the point

The revised Senate health bill draft released Thursday lets health insurers offer plans that do not cover the Affordable Care Act’s essential health benefits, which requires insurers to include a wide array of benefits such as maternity care and mental health services.

Insurers can offer plans without these benefits — unless they’re selling coverage to members of Congress and their staff, who are required to buy coverage on the health law marketplaces. The exemption says this part of the law still applies to any plans sold to Congress.

Do you see it? Why is an exemption needed if this Senate bill is supposed to be a repeal and replace? If it was truly R&R, there would be no need. Because Obamacare would be repealed. If it is creating exemptions, that means that Obamacare is still the law of the land, and the Senate bill simply dinks and dunks, makes some changes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, ie, Obamacare.

One would think Democrats would be happy that these idiots aren’t actually repealing Obamacare. That way, when the GOP loses the House and Senate over the next 2 election cycles, and probably the White House, all because Republican voters will be too mad to vote GOP because they were lied to about R&R, Democrats can get rid of the measures the GOP passes, because Ocare is still around.

Read: Senate Republicans Exempt Themselves From The Non-Repeal/Replace Bill »

Posted in GOP, Healthcare | 50 Comments | Trackback URL

ICE Director: There’s No Population Of Illegal Aliens Which Is Off The Table

By William Teach July 14, 2017 – 7:02 am

Are you here in the United States unlawfully? The ICE director has a message for you (emphasis mine)

(Fox News) There could be as many as 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States and 400,000 could be deported this year, according to the acting ICE director.

Thomas Homan said the number could be even higher, but no one in the country illegally should be “comfortable” right now.

Speaking to Neil Cavuto, Homan said those who cross the border illegally can no longer assume no one is looking for them.

“[President Trump] basically told [us] you can now do your job, you will enforce laws on your books. There’s no population of alien that’s off the table anymore and we’ve been waiting on that for a decade now,” said Homan, noting that illegal immigrants who pose a threat to public safety will always be a higher priority.

Homan said if you enter the U.S. illegally, you have committed a crime and the law will be enforced “without apology.” He also delivered a stern message to the MS-13 street gang in a Daily Caller interview.

“My gang is bigger than theirs and we are going to take them out,” he said, adding that the goal is to make good “as much as we can” on President Trump’s promise to arrest and/or deport these gang members.

It really is a simple concept: anyone who is unlawfully present in the United States can be picked up and subject to deportation orders at any time, regardless of who they are, what their age is, or how they came to the country. Every illegal has their own sob story, designed to bring out the squishes in defense of allowing the illegal to stay in the country. Well, lots of legal residents have their sob stories and excuses as well, as to why they committed a crime, and do not want to be sent to jail. Tough for both classes.

What this does is create fear for those who are here illegally, and, more importantly, creates fear for those who want to come illegally/overstay their visas. This helps reduce the flow of illegals and causes lots of illegals to self deport. If the number is drastically reduced, then perhaps the U.S. can find some sort of accommodation for some who are here illegally. Citizenship should be off the table for most, unless they want to earn it through tough methods like going through the full citizenship method, or serve for a good chunk in the military.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: ICE Director: There’s No Population Of Illegal Aliens Which Is Off The Table »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

There’s One Trick To Solve ‘Climate Change’ Through Capitalism Or Something

By William Teach July 13, 2017 – 4:43 pm

It’s always amusing when people who despise capitalism (well, for other people, because they like getting their own money and maximizing profits in their own life) try and explain capitalism as it applies to their favorite cult, as Peter Kalmus gives it a shot

The Trick to Make Capitalism Help Solve Climate Change

Welcome to the climate emergency. This is what it looks like: dying coral reefs and dialed-in ice sheet disintegration; drought, flood, and refugees. This is what it feels like: a deep uncertainty about the future expressed in economic and political instability. To escape the heat, land and ocean species everywhere are migrating toward the poles. Of the millions of species on our planet, only one foolishly continues to make the problem worse by burning fossil fuels—the one that named itself “wise man,” Homo sapiens.

But as the crisis deepens, the world—with the stunning exception of certain intransigent U.S. politicians—is finally getting the message. The question becomes what to do.

I’m a fan of deep voluntary personal reduction, which (I’ve found) leads to a more satisfying and connected life and enhances one’s ability to effect broader change. But it’s not a solution; we need to leave fossil fuels quickly and globally. The consensus among economists that the way to do this is to make the price of fossil fuels reflect their true cost to society.

Here we go

The best step any nation can take is a revenue-neutral carbon fee.

Here’s how it works: Those who wish to disrupt the climate (to be fair, all of us are complicit as we live our modern lives) should pay for the “privilege.” A price is applied at the first point of sale after the oil, coal, or gas is extracted; then it passes downstream in proportion to the amount of emissions embodied in the transaction. The price will increase over time, giving individuals and businesses time to plan and adjust.

Go that? Government intervention and price controls is “capitalism.”

A carbon price, properly designed, would be comprehensive and effective. It would go far toward correcting a horrifying market failure: that destroying the planet that gave rise to us and cradles us in the violent vastness of space … is profitable. But to realize this potential, two key details must be worked out.

So, the headline is a bunch of mule fritters? Because this sure seems like Classical Socialism, whereby the Government is mostly in charge of the means of production and the economy.

A well-designed carbon fee isn’t the only thing we’ll need to create a deeply just and sustainable society on Earth; ultimately we’ll need a steady-state economy and an end to unsustainable population growth. This will require a tectonic shift in how we see our place in the web of life. But a carbon fee would be a huge step in the right direction.

Whoops, the cat is out of the bag. This isn’t capitalism, it’s Progressivism.

Read: There’s One Trick To Solve ‘Climate Change’ Through Capitalism Or Something »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, Progressive Goals | Comments Off on There’s One Trick To Solve ‘Climate Change’ Through Capitalism Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 13, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert because Other People refuse to buy local, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on when science isn’t settled.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Powerwashing Sidewalks Is Now Considered Raaaaacist

By William Teach July 13, 2017 – 10:47 am

Welcome to the hyper-liberal world of Seattle. They’ve managed to create a big problem with homelessness, and one solution is racist

(Daily Caller) A Seattle, Wash., councilman implied that a new effort to clean excrement off the side walk outside the local courthouse could be racist Tuesday.

The crime and smell of urine and excrement have gotten so bad outside a King County courthouse that two judges are scrambling to find ways to fix the situation, reports the Seattle Times.

Seattle councilmember Larry Gossett isn’t a fan of one solution to power wash the feces from the sidewalks to tamp down on the smell. Power washing the sidewalks is too reminiscent of civil rights activists being hosed down, he said.

I’m betting Gossett doesn’t spend too much time down that way. Of course, the Seattle Times story features a few local residents giving the typical Leftist apologist type talking points, and even the Police captain chimed in

Seattle Police Capt. Mike Teeter, commander of the West Precinct, said that police patrol the area heavily and that while there are certainly people in crisis, or need, who behave in ways that may make others “uncomfortable,” there is often no criminal activity involved.

He also said that police are not able to address some of the things that may be intimidating to occasional visitors, such as seeing someone standing on the street corner and yelling.

Though it makes people “uncomfortable,” he said, it’s not a crime.

Back to the Daily Caller

“When they [potential jurors] come to this courthouse they’re afraid to come in,” said King County Sheriff John Urquhart. “They’re afraid to walk down Third Avenue because what they see.”

Urquhart is asking for an $8,000 increase in budget from the King County Council to have deputies patrol the street. “There is public urination, defecation. That’s a crime,” Urquhart said. “There is smoking marijuana in public.”

Seems there’s a bit of a discrepancy between the two leading LEOs.

Regardless, does this mean that all power washing is now raaaaacist?

Read: Bummer: Powerwashing Sidewalks Is Now Considered Raaaaacist »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Uh Oh: DHS Secretary Kelly Says DACA May Not Survive Court Challenges

By William Teach July 13, 2017 – 7:57 am

And he won’t commit to defending the law in court

(Politico) An Obama-era deportation relief program may soon face a legal challenge — and the Trump administration won’t commit to defending it, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told Hispanic lawmakers at a closed-door meeting Wednesday on Capitol Hill.

Twenty Democratic members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus pressed Kelly for assurances that he would help preserve the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which grants deportation relief and access to work permits to undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. at a young age.

Kelly told the lawmakers that although he personally supports DACA, he can’t guarantee that the administration would defend it in court. He also said that he’d consulted attorneys who told him the program wouldn’t survive a legal challenge.

“It’s not a pretty picture,” Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who attended the meeting, told reporters. “The legal authorities that he’s spoken to suggest that DACA cannot be sustained legally. We have a different view.”

The legal challenge that’s being referred to

But a DHS spokesman followed up that web posting by stating, “The future of the DACA program continues to be under review.” Then, in late June, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his counterparts from nine other Republican-led states sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions that demanded the Trump administration rescind the program. If not, the coalition threatened, it would amend an ongoing lawsuit against another deportation relief program to target DACA as well. Such a move would compel the Trump administration to clarify a position on DACA that it’s preferred to keep vague.

DACA really has no basis in federal law. The Supreme Court essentially upheld a lower court ruling that disallowed the expansion of DACA when Obama was sued by 25 states. As Representative Steve King stated “The point here is … the President does not have the authority to waive immigration law, nor does he have the authority to create it out of thin air, and he’s done both with these Morton memos in this respect.”

Read: Uh Oh: DHS Secretary Kelly Says DACA May Not Survive Court Challenges »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Uh Oh: DHS Secretary Kelly Says DACA May Not Survive Court Challenges | Trackback URL

Sore Losers Introduce Articles Of Impeachment Against Trump

By William Teach July 13, 2017 – 7:35 am

You can expect this bit of silliness to go exactly nowhere

(Free Beacon) Rep. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.) announced on Wednesday that he introduced an article of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

Sherman was joined by Rep. Al Green (D., Texas) as a co-sponsor on the measure. They have both publicly called for Trump’s impeachment in the past, as has Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.). House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has cautioned against impeachment talk, despite her own criticism of Trump.

Republicans control the House of Representatives and many Democrats are hesitant to go as far as calling anything done by Trump “impeachable,” fearing political backlash.

How’s this going to work out?

“I am pleased that Congressman Al Green has joined me in filing Articles of Impeachment against Donald J. Trump,” Sherman said in a statement. “We now begin the effort to force the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on Obstruction of Justice and Russian interference in our election.”

Good luck with that, Brad. Guess who doesn’t control the House?

“As the investigations move forward, additional evidence supporting additional Articles of Impeachment may emerge,” Sherman’s statement said. “However, as to Obstruction of Justice, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b)(3), the evidence we have is sufficient to move forward now.  And the national interest requires that we do so.”

These are the same people who did not want things like Fast and Furious, the 2012 attack in Benghazi, and Hillary Clinton’s server investigated, among others,  despite there being tons more evidence of criminality, and made mockery’s of the hearings.

Of course, what Sherman is doing is partially a threat to attempt to get Trump to change his behavior

Introducing Articles of Impeachment will have two possible outcomes.  First, I have slight hope it will inspire an ‘intervention’ in the White House.  If Impeachment is real, if they actually see Articles, perhaps we will see incompetency replaced by care.  Perhaps uncontrollable impulses will be controlled. And perhaps the danger our nation faces will be ameliorated.

Second, and more likely, filing Articles of Impeachment is the first step on a very long road.  But if the impulsive incompetency continues, then eventually—many, many months from now—Republicans will join the impeachment effort.

I author Articles of Impeachment not to change our national policy.  I served with Mike Pence in Congress for twelve years and I disagree with him on just about everything.  I never dreamed I would author a measure that would put him in the White House.  I am introducing Articles of Impeachment to begin a long process to protect our country from abuse of power, obstruction of justice, and impulsive, ignorant incompetence.”​

Where was Sherman when Obama was abusing his power and being incompetent? Of course, incompetence is not an impeachable offense. This is all a bit of show for the lunatic Democrat base from the Sore Loser Party.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Sore Losers Introduce Articles Of Impeachment Against Trump »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove