Warmists Robert J. Samuelson: We’re Not Sure What’s Going To Happen, But Let’s Get A Carbon Tax In Place Anyhow

The delusion of the Warmists is on complete display in this opinion piece called Global warming pragmatism

Economist Robert Pindyck of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently examined the computer models that estimate the effects and costs of climate change — and he didn’t like what he found. The models reflect two gaping uncertainties, he says. First, we don’t know how much increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) will raise global temperatures. “There are feedback loops” — interactions between greenhouse gases and weather — “that aren’t easy to measure.” The models make assumptions. Next, he says, we don’t know what economic losses will result from higher temperatures. More assumptions. The “damage functions” in the models, he says, “are completely made-up.”

Huh. So the economist Samuelson cites states that Warmists and their computer models and prognostications and scaremongering are plain mule fritters.

Pindyck sounds like a “global warming denier.” He isn’t. True, he thinks climate change and its adverse economic consequences could be wildly overstated. He also thinks they could be wildly understated. The effects might ultimately be catastrophic. We simply don’t know. Ignorance reigns. The best course, he says, would be to adopt a modest carbon tax — because there are certainly some ill effects of global warming — and adjust it as we learn more. Meanwhile, we shouldn’t assume that computer models convey scientific truth. “The models create an illusion of knowledge,” he says. “For me, the issue is being honest.”

Well, obviously, that’s the answer, yet another tax. I guess we’re going to tax your bodies, made up of carbon…oh, wait, that’s right, these Warmists keep calling everyone who doesn’t believe in “climate change” “anti-science”, yet they can’t even use the proper term, “carbon dioxide”. There is a difference between that and “carbon”.

Samuelson notes that there are three things which keep Government from Doing Something, including

Second, it requires that governments inflict pain (higher energy costs) on today’s citizens for hypothetical gains (less global warming) for tomorrow’s citizens. The politics are ugly.

Yet, this has been tried in many countries, particularly after the Kyoto Protocol was passed. All people in those countries obtained were higher taxes and higher costs, higher unemployment, more and more controlling regulations, and a reduction in life quality. It saw massive seat losses for the Australian political party that passed their form of a carbon tax, along with a loss of control of the government. Japan wants nothing to do with any sort of scheme (remember, Kyoto is in Japan). Same with New Zealand. Canada is moving away from this. So are other countries.

There’s no obvious way around these obstacles. Why not try something different? The crux of the matter is putting a price on carbon — through a tax on oil, coal and natural gas — that reflects global warming’s costs. This would promote energy efficiency and favor renewables. The trouble, as Pindyck says, is that we don’t know what that tax should be, because we don’t know global warming’s full effects.

But, hey, let’s slap a tax on the people of the USA anyhow! WarmistThink. A tax in search of a problem. The problem mostly being made up in the first place.

Read: Warmists Robert J. Samuelson: We’re Not Sure What’s Going To Happen, But Let’s Get A Carbon Tax In Place Anyhow »

Here We Go: NY Times Editorial Board Finally Figures Out An Angle On Obamacare

The Editorial Board of the “Paper of Record” has been strangely silent over the past couple of weeks, with only tiny mentions of the “Affordable” Care Act over the past month, despite the enormous problems that have cropped up. Their last big one was when they deemed that Obama “misspoke” when he said “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period.” When they do chime in, it tends to be to carry the administration’s water (I bet NY Times bigwigs want nothing to do with signing up through the Exchange themselves) and go after Republicans. They finally found another angle

The Shame of American Health Care

Even as Americans struggle with the changes required by health care reform, an international survey released last week by the Commonwealth Fund, a research organization, shows why change is so necessary.

The report found that by virtually all measures of cost, access to care and ease of dealing with insurance problems, Americans fared poorly compared with people in other advanced countries. The survey covered 20,000 adults in the United States and 10 other industrial nations — Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and Britain, all of which put in place universal or near-universal health coverage decades ago. The United States spends far more than any of these countries on a per capita basis and as a percent of the national economy.

Obviously, O-care is The Answer!

The Affordable Care Act was created to address these problems by covering tens of millions of uninsured people and providing subsidies to help many of them pay for policies; by setting limits on the out-of-pocket costs that patients must bear; and by requiring that all policies cover specified benefits.

Americans are understandably frustrated with the Obama administration’s failure to produce a functioning website. President Obama’s erroneous statements that all people who like their current insurance policies can keep them — not true for many people buying insurance in the individual market — has added to anger and misunderstanding. The reform law, however imperfect, is needed to bring the dysfunctional American health care system up to levels already achieved in other advanced nations.

It may have been created to address these problems (doubtful), but it in no way accomplishes any of what they say. Cost is going up in the form of premiums and deductibles. Access to care is going down as networks are limited and doctors want nothing to do with either the insurance or more Medicaid patients. The issue of dealing with insurance companies will probably not change, though now more people will have to deal with The Government, vis a vis the majority of signups who were shifted to Medicaid. Furthermore, access will be more of a problem when the unelected and unaccountable Independent Payment Advisory Board (aka “death panels”) gets involved in determining care, and you have a large number of people with Medicaid and Exchange plans accessing a limited number of medical facilities. These plans also do not include the best medical centers, as well.

Certainly, there is a problem with the healthcare system in the United States. You can start with the notion that this is a huge country with 300 million plus people and mandates for the system come from a federal government way away in D.C., determining rules and regulations with little regard to reality. Then the States chime in. Both often ignore the medical and insurance professionals. There are things we can do to help fix the problems, much of them created by Government. Obamacare is not that answer.

Read: Here We Go: NY Times Editorial Board Finally Figures Out An Angle On Obamacare »

Only In The Obameconomy Do You See This Scenario

A bit of a late Sunday night musing, but couldn’t let this one go. The Star Ledger’s Kathleen O’Brien offers “Obamacare tax pitfalls: Two scenarios“. Here’s the first

Q. Let’s say you’re a single, 27-year-old who works at a pizzeria. At the time you apply for Obamacare, you’re making $15,900 a year. Halfway through 2014, you land a job as a graphics artist that doesn’t have benefits, but you double your salary to $31,800. Thrilled by your change of fortune, you forget to update the federal insurance website. What financial impact will that have?

The very fact that anyone would even consider writing that first part as a viable scenario tells you all you need to know about the Obama presidency and how pitiful the economy is under his stewardship.

Read: Only In The Obameconomy Do You See This Scenario »

NY Times: Say, That Climate Change Thing Sure Creates Inequities, Eh?

I told you the other day about how Warmists are making a concerted push with the “inequities” meme. I’ve seen a bunch of tweets regarding #COP19 along those same lines. Now, here comes the NY Times, which apparently received the memo about the meme

Growing Clamor About Inequities of Climate Crisis

Following a devastating typhoon that killed thousands in the Philippines, a routine international climate change conference here turned into an emotional forum, with developing countries demanding compensation from the worst polluting countries for damage they say they are already suffering.

From the time a scientific consensus emerged that human activity was changing the climate, it has been understood that the nations that contributed least to the problem would be hurt the most. Now, even as the possible consequences of climate change have surged — from the typhoons that have raked the Philippines and India this year to the droughts in Africa, to rising sea levels that threaten to submerge entire island nations — no consensus has emerged over how to rectify what many call “climate injustice.”

Growing demands to address the issue have become an emotionally charged flash point at negotiations here at the 19th conference of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which continues this week. (snip)

Although the divide between rich and poor nations has bedeviled international climate talks for two decades, the debate over how to address the disproportionate effects has steadily gained momentum. Poor nations here are pressing for a new effort that goes beyond reducing emissions and adapting to a changing climate.

So, much of the article goes along in the same vein. The inequity meme is part of the “climate justice” progressive talking point, deriving from their “social justice” beliefs, which come from their need to create more and more Big Government.

And what these “developing countries” want is $$$. Lots of it. Because they’ve done so great with all the money we’ve given them for other things. And because Bad Weather is never supposed to happen and the climate is always supposed to stay static.

Read: NY Times: Say, That Climate Change Thing Sure Creates Inequities, Eh? »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful wooden bench made to overlook a changing climate which changes because someone cut down a tree to make the evil bench, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Adrienne’s Corner, with a post wondering whether Obama wrote the “lose your plan” rules.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another fantastic day in the Once And Future Nation Of America. My Devils won, my Pirates kick royal booty, we’ll see what the Giants do. This pinup is by Gil Elvgren, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers notes the doctor drop is starting
  2. The Gateway Pundit covers the (at least) 27 Dems who said you could keep your plan
  3. Raised On Hoecakes brings a really heartwarming story
  4. Sister Toldjah brings naked socialism…not the good kind
  5. The Lonely Conservative notes a wee bit of an issue with bringing back insurance in NY
  6. The Last Tradition notes more Obamacare registration issues
  7. The Daley Gator says that it must suck to be a liberal
  8. Doug Powers has some Obamacare victims you shouldn’t fee sorry for…I don’t
  9. Yid with Lid has stupid media bias tricks
  10. The Last Refuge wonders about race based car loans
  11. That Mr. G Guy notes that Biden got a woman killed
  12. Public Secrets brings out the cluebat for mugged liberals
  13. protein wisdom has language highjacking for O-care
  14. neo-neocon has the modified Obamacare rapture
  15. And last, but not least, Joshuapundit notes an awkward anti-Israel moment at the UN

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Good News: Amnesty Key To Making “Affordable” Care Act Work

I doubt that this will become a regular talking point for Democrats, but I also bet that they all thinking this

(Washington Times) Rep. Jared Polis said Friday the key problem with health care right now is that illegal immigrants aren’t included in Obamacare, and said part of the solution is to pass a bill granting them citizenship rights.

The House is debating a GOP-written bill that would allow Americans to keep their health plans that have been canceled under Obamacare, but Mr. Polis, a Colorado Democrat, said the chamber should instead be looking at ways to make sure everyone in the country is covered by the Affordable Care Act — including illegal immigrants.

“American citizens are essentially being forced to pay for the health care costs of people who are here illegally every day, until we pass comprehensive immigration reform,” he said. “We’re wondering why rates are going up. … It’s no surprise. When somebody doesn’t have insurance, their costs are shifted onto other people that do.” (snip)

But Mr. Polis said leaving (illegal aliens) outside of the health mandate means that they end up using emergency care, but don’t end up paying their own bills — leaving the rest of the country to pick up those costs.

Here’s an idea: instead of legalizing, them, kick them out. Sure, there are tiny percentage who we might want to offer a pathway, a true pathway, not straight legalization or a phony pathway, but most need to leave, both those who jumped the border and those who have overstayed their visas.

Dems want to pass their shamnesty bill, but they would need to get the illegals their green cards prior to being able to enroll them in O-care. And we all know that the minute the Senate bill would be passed Dems would push to move past all the obstacles in the bill to get to the green cards.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Good News: Amnesty Key To Making “Affordable” Care Act Work »

Warmist: Fossil Fuels Need To Be Priced Out Of The Market

You can call this fascism, marxism, socialism, communism, whatever you want. Either way, Warmists want Super Big Government to control every aspect of your lives and the private economy. Zhao Zhong, a former nuclear engineer at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, is the China program coordinator at Pacific Environment, an environmental group, writes an opinion piece over at the NY Times, in context of a debate on whether nuclear energy is the way to go

Price Fossil Fuels Out of the Market

I agree that we should move away from our dependence on greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels at a faster pace and find replacements for our energy needs at magnitudes much greater than current expectations.

The single most important thing we must do is place a high price, or a strict cap, on carbon emissions to make fossil fuel energy less attractive when compared to other energy sources. We are at the beginning stages of capping coal in China but much more needs to be done. If we price coal and other fossil fuels to capture their true costs, it will immediately make all the alternatives to fossil fuels more competitive and drive innovations in the clean energy sector.

This seems to be the thoughts, er, feelings of most Warmists. Funny how they want Everyone Else to suffer for their beliefs, yet they themselves won’t give up their own use of fossil fuels, which they say is Bad.

Read: Warmist: Fossil Fuels Need To Be Priced Out Of The Market »

If All You See…

…is an awesome big city, which everyone should be forced to move to in order to save the climate, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is House of Sunny, with a post on if you like your laughter you can keep your laughter (via Moonbattery)

Read: If All You See… »

Man With Largest Footprint In The World* Touts His Clean Energy Agenda

I’ll give you a moment to stop laughing and clean the tears from your eyes….ready? With Obamacare imploding around his ears, with the deficit continuing to skyrocket, with record debt, record numbers of people out of jobs in the long term, historic numbers of Americans giving up on getting a job in despair, running without a budget since he took office, foreign policy a mess, and so much more #Fail, what does he focus on?

(The Hill) President Obama focused on energy independence in his weekly address (video here, text here), following a week dominated by the chaotic rollout of his signature healthcare law.

Obama touted increased natural gas production, more efficient energy use and a drop in carbon emissions in his speech, arguing that lower carbon emissions don’t slow economic growth.

“Between more clean energy, and less wasted energy, our emissions of dangerous carbon pollution are actually falling. That’s good news for anyone who cares about the world we leave to our kids,” he said. “And while our carbon emissions have been dropping, our economy has been growing. Our businesses have created 7.8 million new jobs in the past 44 months. It proves that the old argument that we can’t strengthen the economy and be good stewards of our planet at the same time is a false choice. We can do both. And we have to do both.”

Well, he has the un-scientific idiot term of “dangerous carbon pollution” down pat. It’s neither dangerous nor pollution. Nor is it carbon. Properly, it is is carbon dioxide. A trace gas necessary for life on Earth. Much of the decline can be linked to the horrible economic conditions of the USA, where people came up with a term, “staycation”, for staying home during their vacation instead of traveling.

He also yammers on about how this is creating jobs and stuff. I’ll wait while you clean your screen from spitting your drink on it.

“More good jobs.  Cheaper and cleaner sources of energy.  A secure energy future.  Thanks to the grit and resilience of American businesses and the American people, that’s where we’re heading.  And as long as I’m President, that’s where we’re going to keep heading – to leave our children a stronger economy, and a safer planet,” he concluded.

Remember the list of all the green energy failures under Obama? Heck, Heritage put that together a year ago, and it continues to grow. Several Obama backed green companies have gone down the tubes since then. One of the biggest ones since was Ecotality. Fisker’s cars are catching on fire. His solar auction in Colorado bombed. The Institute for Energy Research determined

But the data are nonetheless revealing: for the over $26 billion committed since 2009, DOE Section 1703 and 1705 loan guarantees have created only 2,298 permanent jobs – that’s $11.45 million per job.

Meanwhile, he won’t approve the full Keystone XL pipeline. They’re lollygagging on fracking and drilling leases. He sends his dog on a separate plan for vacations.

*Obama’s “carbon footprint” is estimated at 41K metric tons. The average American’s is around 19 metric tons. The average for the world is 4 metric tons.

Read: Man With Largest Footprint In The World* Touts His Clean Energy Agenda »

Pirate's Cove