Texas Lifts Mask Mandate, Allows Businesses To 100% Reopen

By William Teach March 3, 2021 – 10:30 am

And the media and Democrats are losing their minds

Texas becomes biggest US state to lift COVID-19 mask mandate

Texas is lifting its mask mandate, Gov. Greg Abbott said Tuesday, making it the largest state to no longer require one of the most effective ways to slow the spread of the coronavirus.

The announcement in Texas, where the virus has killed more than 43,000 people, rattled doctors and big city leaders who said they are now bracing for another deadly resurgence. One hospital executive in Houston said he told his staff they would need more personnel and ventilators.

Federal health officials this week urgently warned states to not let their guard down, warning that the pandemic is far from over.

Abbott, a Republican, has faced sustained criticism from his party in America’s biggest red state over the statewide mask mandate — which was imposed eight months ago — as well as business occupancy limits that Texas will also scuttle next week. The mask order was only ever lightly enforced, even during the worst outbreaks of the pandemic.

This has made many go crazy, such as CNN’s Chris Cillizza

As coronavirus case across the country are dropping, cases in Texas actually increased by 5% over the last two weeks, according to statistics from Johns Hopkins University. Which makes this a very odd time for Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott to do what he did on Tuesday.

“Too many Texans have been sidelined from employment opportunities,” Abbott said. “Too many small business owners have struggled to pay their bills. This must end. It is now time to open Texas 100%.”

What Abbott meant by 100% is this: He is dropping the state’s mask mandate and allowing all businesses to open at 100% capacity beginning March 10. He justified those moves by noting that 5.7 million Covid-19 vaccine shots have been given in the state and that Texans have “mastered the daily habits to avoid getting Covid.”

Abbott’s move seems entirely motivated by politics rather than public health. Doctors and public health experts continue to warn that letting down our guard — and our masks — at this point is a major mistake. While vaccinations are on the rise, we remain a long way from herd immunity. (Less than 7% of Texans are fully vaccinated.) And the precipitous drop in cases over the last month or so has quite clearly plateaued even as the number of tests has declined — two indicators that suggest we are not out of the woods just yet.

Does Chris live in Texas? No? Perhaps he should let Texas do what Texas wants to do and mind his own business. And where were his complaints when it was politics driving so many of the unhinged mask and other mandates throughout the nation?

(Texas Tribune) Mayors and county judges in some of Texas’ largest urban areas criticized Gov. Greg Abbott over his decision to lift the statewide face mask mandate next week, saying it contradicts health officials’ advice as infections continue to spread throughout the state, which averaged over 200 reported deaths a day over the last week.

Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price, a fellow Republican, called Abbott’s order “premature” and asked him to allow more people to get the vaccine.

Most everyone else mentioned are Democrats, but, it begs the question: if masks work, then why is COVID spreading so much? Masks were supposed to stop this, right? Right?

But, stores and businesses are allowed to have their own mandates, and many will. Masks will also be required at airports with federal guidance and on metros.

But, why the focus on Texas? No one made a big deal about North Dakota, Montana, and Iowa lifting their mandates in the last few weeks. Nor Michigan, Mississippi, and Louisiana lifting theirs this week, just like Texas. There are many states which have no statewide mandates. Some have very limited, like with Nebraska, which only requires them “for both clients and staff at barbershops, salons and other personal-care businesses.” Lincoln and Omaha have stricter mandates, being more densely populated cities.

Why? Because Leftists love to hate Texas, because the state is typically a big success. What will the nuts do when the removal of the mask mandate doesn’t see doom?

Read: Texas Lifts Mask Mandate, Allows Businesses To 100% Reopen »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Bat Soup Virus | 29 Comments | Trackback URL

LA Times ClimaEditorial Board Calls For Banning All Fossil Fueled Vehicles

By William Teach March 3, 2021 – 8:59 am

This begs the question: will the LA Times give up their own use of fossil fueled vehicles to gather and disseminate the news? Will the members of the editorial board declare they have each given up their own fossil fueled vehicles? Perhaps the paper can mandate that employees do not own fossil fueled vehicles? It would be fun to see how the whole of greater LA County runs without fossil fuel vehicles

Editorial: To save the planet from climate change, gas guzzlers have to die

The numbers paint a daunting picture. In 2019, consumers worldwide bought 64 million new personal cars and 27 million new commercial motor vehicles, a paltry 2.1 million of which were electric-powered. Climate scientists tell us that we have less than a decade to make meaningful reductions in carbon emissions — including those from internal combustion engines — if we have any hope of staving off the worst effects of global warming.

Yet manufacturers are still making, and consumers are still buying, overwhelming numbers of vehicles that will, on average, continue to spew carbon into the atmosphere for a dozen years after they first leave the lot. That means new cars bought this year will still be on the road well into the 2030s — long after the point when we should have slashed emissions.

Like we said, a daunting picture.

Manufacturers are still making because consumers are still buying. Consider that the local Honda dealers has 152 regular Accords and 38 Accord Hybrids in stock at the moment (I know they are we low on EXL inventory, with a lot on order). An EXL regular Accord is $32,440. The comparable hybrid is $33,885. The difference in costs is not that much with hybrids these days, but, people still prefer the horsepower of a regular. It’s those who drive a lot or really want the fuel economy (30 city/38 highway vs 48/48). The difference between a Civic and an Insight (really, almost the same car) and a CRV and CRV Hybrid are similar monetarily. It’s simply a choice. And way more will choose the non-hybrid. The thing is, all these hybrids, including Prius’ and plugins, still run primarily on gas, with an electric motor assist. So, they would have to go. Most people have zero interest in a straight plugin. The rollout of the Honda Clarity was such a disaster than they only sell them on the west coast, not even the NE states that had been selling them.

The only straight plugin really selling well is the Tesla, and not many can afford a vehicle in the upper $30k’s.

What will it take to throttle back the gas burners and expand exponentially the number of vehicles that run on electric batteries, hydrogen fuel cells or other non-fossil energy sources? Political will, strong government thumbs on the scale to favor zero-emission vehicles over gas burners (an all-out ban on their production and sale is likely too radical for the world, but it would certainly help), and increased spending on developing and producing clean energy sources, battery technologies and charging capabilities.

In other words, it will take Government flexing their authoritarian muscle. That’s not democracy, as the Dems like to put it, nor is that what takes place in a Constitutional Republic. But, hey, it’s easy for elites who make lots of money to demand these changes which will utterly hose the middle and lower classes.

Still, ending reliance on fossil fuel to power engines will be crucial, and among the most challenging tasks given how deeply insinuated such vehicles have become in global commerce and transit systems, from the personal vehicles we use to fetch groceries to the vessels that move products around the world to the airplanes that take a few hours to shuttle people to places that used to take days or weeks to reach by train or ship.

So, by gas guzzlers the LATEB seems to be also including planes and sea going vessels. I suppose this would include pleasure craft such as SeaDoos and small ski boats. This would hit Leonardo DiCarpio hard, as no more big pleasure yachts. Would this ground high flying Warmists like John Travolta and Harrison Ford? What would be the hit on California, which imports and exports huge amounts of goods via their ports on fossil fueled ships. How many would be out of a job? Warmists just think this stuff can happen without major economic disruption and pain. Because they’re nuts and cultists.

Read: LA Times ClimaEditorial Board Calls For Banning All Fossil Fueled Vehicles »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | Comments Off on LA Times ClimaEditorial Board Calls For Banning All Fossil Fueled Vehicles | Trackback URL

Democrats Reintroduce Universal Background Checks Bills In House And Senate

By William Teach March 3, 2021 – 8:20 am

Surprisingly, this is not as bad as you’d expect from Democrats, which should make people think “what’s the catch?” even if there is no catch

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy introduces universal background check law

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut is reintroducing legislation Tuesday that would require universal background checks on the sale or transfer of all firearms. Universal background checks are largely supported by Americans but have not gained traction in Congress.

Murphy’s bill, the Background Check Expansion Act, would extend a background check requirement to unlicensed and private firearm sellers before selling a firearm. Current federal law doesn’t require unlicensed sellers to do background checks before transferring firearms.

Polling from gun reform advocacy groups Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords finds 93% of Americans support a background check requirement for all gun sales. In 2019, the House passed a comprehensive background check bill, but it died in the Republican-controlled Senate. Democratic Congressman Mike Thompson of California will introduce the House version of the Senate bill on Tuesday. (snip)

Democrats hoping to pass gun safety laws have a champion in the White House, and President Joe Biden last month called on Congress to pass gun control legislation, including background checks. However, the legislation still requires 10 Republican senators to vote with Democrats to advance the bill, a significant obstacle to passage.

Senator Richard Blumenthal, who is cosponsoring the legislation, is hopeful that this time may be different.

“My conversation with Republicans indicated they get it,” he told reporters Tuesday. “The American people are responding to a political movement that has resulted from Parkland, Sandy Hook, Las Vegas — the shorthand of tragedies that have caused this political movement to be a force that has met this moment of reckoning.”

This legislation was killed in the Senate last November because Murphy asked for unanimous consent and Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith objected, wanting more time to consider and debate. As far as it goes, it is very simple (link to the legislation here), requiring a background check on all firearm transfers, with exceptions being “transfers between law enforcement officers, temporarily loaning firearms for hunting and sporting events, providing firearms as gifts to immediate family members, transferring a firearm as part of an inheritance, or temporarily transferring a firearm for immediate self-defense.” There doesn’t seem to be any tricks in it. There are no requirements to register a firearm with Los Federales or any government agency, or create a public registry, or tell government where you keep your guns, like Sheila Jackson Lee’s bill.

“The overwhelming majority of Americans support ensuring background checks on all gun sales. And for good reason; the loopholes in the current system make it too easy for guns to end up in the hands of those prohibited by law from buying them. It is far past time that Congress answers the call to better protect our communities from senseless gun violence by passing the Background Check Expansion Act,” said Durbin.

Raise your hand if you think criminals will request background checks when giving their criminal friends a firearm. Or when they are stealing one. Raise your hand if you think this will make any difference in criminals shooting each other in places like Chicago. Raise your hand if you think this will make a difference in shootings, because many of the mass shootings were committed by people who passed a background check.

So, if it passes and fails to make a dent in criminals shooting each other, what will the Democrats demand next? It might be worth passing, because then the GOP and 2nd Amendment supporters can say “hey, we just passed a backgrounds check, we need to give it 5-10 years to see if it makes a difference before pushing something more extreme” when Dems try pushing something like Jackson Lee’s bill.

You do have to wonder about poison pills, because the Senate version has exactly zero Republicans as cosponsors. The House version has 2 Republicans, so, of course the media will call this “bipartisan.”

Read: Democrats Reintroduce Universal Background Checks Bills In House And Senate »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Young Aussie Climate Cultists Take Their Case To Court

By William Teach March 2, 2021 – 3:00 pm

The Cult seems to take the stance that since they cannot convince people to practice what the Cult preaches, despite 30+ years of spreading awareness, which means legislative bodies, even believer ones, can only get a little bit passed, they will try and get the courts to impose the will of the Cult, failing to see that the taxes and loss of freedom, liberty and choice will effect themselves

‘A duty of care’: Australian teenagers take their climate crisis plea to court

Eight teenagers and an octogenarian nun head to an Australian court on Tuesday to launch what they hope will prove to be a landmark case – one that establishes the federal government’s duty of care in protecting future generations from a worsening climate crisis.

If successful, the people behind the class action believe it may set a precedent that stops the government approving new fossil fuel projects.

As with any novel legal argument, its chances of success are unclear, but the case is not happening in isolation.

It is one of a number of climate-related litigation cases expected before Australian courts and tribunals in the months ahead as lawyers and activists aim to use the law to force change they say is not coming quickly enough from Canberra or, in many cases, state governments.

Their arguments apparently aren’t good enough to sway Other People to Comply. They should have started with practicing what they preach.

The lead applicant of the case in the federal court in Melbourne this week is Anj Sharma, a 16-year-old student. Her involvement evolved from her role helping organise a Greta Thunberg-inspired school strike for climate in September 2019, when about 100,000 marched in the Victorian capital.

The case is a response to a proposal by Whitehaven Coal to extend its Vickery coalmine in northern New South Wales. The expansion of the mine could lead to an extra 100m tonnes of CO2 – about 20% of Australia’s annual climate footprint – being released into the atmosphere as the extracted coal is shipped overseas and burned to make steel and generate electricity.

The teenagers and their legal team argue the federal environment minister, Sussan Ley, would be breaching a common law duty of care to protect younger people against future harm if she used her powers under national environment laws to allow the mine extension to go ahead.

It’s always something with these people. Let’s see them power their smartphones with solar. Let’s see them sweat and freeze in school. Let’s see them have to walk or bike to school and everywhere else. Let’s see what happens when they can’t stream their shows and videos, cannot upload and watch their silly selfie videos.

Anj says all eight have “very personal stories about climate change”, including the changing impact of the monsoon season on family members in India and witnessing firsthand the impact of fracking for coal-seam gas.

“Stories”. Whatever. You’re children.

Read: Young Aussie Climate Cultists Take Their Case To Court »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 2, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Diogenes’ Middle Finger, with a post on the media whining that their new boyfriend pays them little attention.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Bummer: The U.S. Is Edging Towards Normal, Alarming Officials

By William Teach March 2, 2021 – 10:30 am

Wasn’t that the point of all the COVID measures, from massive lockdowns and restrictions in some states to much looser ones in others, from mask mandates to business closures to closing schools for a bit (and longer with some states) to developing vaccines (which Dems said wouldn’t happen for years)?

From the link

Tens of thousands of students walked into classrooms in Chicago public schools on Monday for the first time in nearly a year. Restaurants in Massachusetts were allowed to operate without capacity limits, and venues like roller skating rinks and movie theaters in most of the state opened with fewer restrictions. And South Carolina erased its limits on large gatherings.

Across the country, the first day of March brought a wave of reopenings and liftings of pandemic restrictions, signs that more Americans were tentatively emerging from months of isolation, even if not everyone agrees that the time is ripe. (snip)

Given all that, some experts worry that the reopenings are coming a bit too soon.

“We’re, hopefully, in between what I hope will be the last big wave, and the beginning of the period where I hope Covid will become very uncommon,” said Robert Horsburgh, an epidemiologist at the Boston University School of Public Health. “But we don’t know that. I’ve been advocating for us to just hang tight for four to six more weeks.”

The director of the C.D.C., Dr. Rochelle Walensky, said at the briefing on Monday that she was “really worried” about the rollbacks of restrictions in some states. She cautioned that with the decline in cases “stalling” and with variants spreading, “we stand to completely lose the hard-earned ground we have gained.”

Things have to get somewhat back to normal at some point, and the elites just can’t keep scaring everyone and keeping people locked down, businesses closed, businesses running at low capacity. People are opting out of this, which is certainly one of the reasons more and more people are playing the “leave your nose uncovered” game with their masks.

Read: Bummer: The U.S. Is Edging Towards Normal, Alarming Officials »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Latest Warmist Idea: 250K Green Apprenticeships For COVID Recovery

By William Teach March 2, 2021 – 8:23 am

Wait, aren’t apprenticeships typically unpaid positions? It’s 2021, not the Middle Ages

Boost pandemic recovery with 250,000 green apprenticeships, Friends of the Earth urges

A vast skills pipeline of 250,000 green apprenticeships leading to full-time jobs across the burgeoning low carbon economy could address both climate breakdown and the post-Covid crisis in youth unemployment, research released today by Friends of the Earth contends.

Carried out by analyst firm Transition Economics on behalf of the green campaign group, the study sets out how a major skills push backed by £10.6bn of government funding to cover wage subsidies and training schemes across the UK could create much-needed jobs in renewable energy, woodland creation, and peatland restoration.

The training could be delivered at a network of national and regional ‘Centres of Excellence for Zero Carbon Skills’ at further education colleges, while diversity measures such as bursaries of £1,500 could help promote participation in green apprenticeships among disadvantaged groups including Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic communities, women, and disabled people, it argues.

Researchers also identified the regions with the greatest potential for green apprenticeship creation. Among combined authority and metro mayor areas, London leads the pack with an estimated potential for over 44,200 green apprenticeships, while West Midlands comes second with 19,400, followed by Greater Manchester with just over 14,000.

But against its estimates for green apprenticeship potential, the report also highlights the current bleak employment outlook for young people in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. If all young people currently without a job remain unemployed for a year, it could result in £39bn in lost wages in the UK over the next two decades, it warns.

That’s around 15 billion U.S. dollars to train people for jobs that barely exist to replace jobs that COVID lockdown killed off. With wage subsidies, because the jobs really aren’t worth all that much on the market (apparently, green jobs are like working at a fast food spot). Especially since they are apparently lots of manual labor jobs, and how many of these youngsters, especially from the cities, are willing to work these types of low skill jobs in the countryside? And, of course, they have to put the racial elements into their little scheme. Why do Leftists always think that “minorities” cannot do anything without the Helpful Hand Of Government? Isn’t that rather racist?

Why does Government have to create these so-called jobs? If there was a call for them the private sector would have created them already.

Perhaps the UK, which was one of the worst nations when it came to lockdowns, could reopen their economy and the jobs could come back.

And reports today suggested tomorrow’s Budget is expected to include a £57m green jobs and skills package for Scotland, in part designed to help workers in the oil industry become skilled in working on cleaner technologies.

What if they don’t want to? What if they like working in the oil industry, and like the money? If the government has to spend lots to subsidize green jobs, perhaps they don’t pay that well.

BTW, if you don’t think the climate crisis (scam) isn’t about far left politics, look at this article and see how they write about it.

Read: Latest Warmist Idea: 250K Green Apprenticeships For COVID Recovery »

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

Democrats Not Taking Potential Death Of $15 Minimum In “COVID” Bill Very Well

By William Teach March 2, 2021 – 7:44 am

But, then, it’s nothing new for hardcore Leftist to lose their minds when they don’t get their way, much like a 2 year old losing their minds of really dumb things

Liberals on fire over failure on $15 minimum wage

“Why is my child crying”

Liberal senators and outside pressure groups are steaming over the Senate’s seeming failure to move a COVID-19 relief package with a provision hiking the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour.

An adverse decision from the Senate parliamentarian means Democrats can’t move the $15 minimum using special budgetary rules meant to sidestep the filibuster.

That is leading to calls to overrule or fire the parliamentarian, or to get rid of the filibuster, which essentially requires legislation to secure 60 votes to proceed through the Senate.

Don’t like the rules? Fire the person who explains them and try and install someone who’ll ignore the rules. If they get rid of the filibuster they should remember that they won’t have control of the Senate forever, and you know they’ll caterwaul when the GOP runs roughshod over the minority party. If the minimum wage going to $15 is so popular, why not pass a separate bill? Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema have both stated they won’t vote for it in what is supposed to be a COVID relief bill, so even nuking the filibuster would leave Dems a few votes short of passage, but, they would be open to doing it separately.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the Senate’s leading proponent of a $15-an-hour minimum wage, on Monday called on Democratic colleagues to “ignore” the parliamentarian’s ruling and pledged he would force a vote on the issue his week.

“My personal view is that the idea that we have a Senate staffer, a high-ranking staffer, deciding whether 30 million Americans get a pay raise or not is non-sensical,” he said. “We have got to make that decision, not a staffer who’s unelected, so my own view is that we should ignore the rulings, the decision of the parliamentarian.”

So, don’t listen to the person who understand the rules. This brings to mind the old saying about the US being a nation of Law, not of Men. But, go ahead and attempt to pass it. If you manage via reconciliation there will be lots of lawsuits filed immediately, and no one will get COVID relief.

Nearly two dozen House progressives called on Biden and Vice President Harris to overturn the parliamentarian’s ruling, something that would require the support of all 50 Senate Democrats plus Vice President Harris’s tie-breaking vote.

“Eighty-one million people cast their ballots to elect you on a platform that called for a $15 minimum wage,” the progressive lawmakers wrote in a letter to Biden and Harris.

“We urge you to keep that promise and call on the Presiding Officer of the Senate to refute the Senate Parliamentarian’s advice … and maintain the $15 minimum wage provision in the American Rescue Plan,” they wrote.

Again, if it’s so darned popular, why do the Democrats have to play this game of sticking it in what’s supposed to be about COVID relief?

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), another influential progressive who ran a strong campaign for president in 2020, said Monday she supports a vote to overrule the parliamentarian but said the bigger problem is the Senate’s filibuster rule, which requires that legislation pass with 60 votes if it faces procedural objections.

“If we would get rid of the filibuster, then we wouldn’t have to keep trying to force the camel through the eye of the needle. Instead, we would do what the majority of Americans want us to do, and in this particular case, that’s raise the minimum wage,” Warren added.

Joe Manchin won’t vote to get rid of it, and, there are those quiet Democrats out there who may not, either, knowing that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and there’s an old saying about coming back to bite one in the ass.

Brian Fallon, the executive director of Demand Justice, another progressive advocacy group, is also urging Senate Democrats to overrule the parliamentarian.

“Overrule the parliamentarian or end the filibuster. Senate process is not an excuse for failure to get results,” he tweeted.

The people screaming about following the rules in our Democracy!!!!! are the same ones saying to ditch the rules for convenience.

Meanwhile, since we’re talking supposed COVID relief

California poised for $19 billion surplus, despite COVID-19 lockdowns

By the end of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic eviscerated roughly 1.6 million jobs in California and slashed the value of business properties by more than 30%. Despite it all, California managed to collect $10.5 billion more in taxes than predicted, putting the state on track for a $19 billion surplus to spend by the end of the fiscal year on July 1.

It’s so much money that, for just the second time ever, the state is projected to trigger a state law requiring the government to send refunds to taxpayers.

This doesn’t even get into the notion of how much California might have saved from government outlays being a lot lower with people on furlough, from not having to use much electricity and water at many state government buildings, etc. So, why is it necessary to have the huge slush fund for state and local governments in the COVID bill? Money states and cities do not actually need?

Read: Democrats Not Taking Potential Death Of $15 Minimum In “COVID” Bill Very Well »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, What Will It Take To Make People And Businesses Comply To Stop Climate Apocalypse?

By William Teach March 1, 2021 – 3:00 pm

I have a pretty good idea: can you guess what it is?

What can make businesses and consumers take climate change seriously?

The Biden Administration has identified addressing climate change – specifically, global warming – as one of its top priorities. Indeed, they are incorporating climate change into both their foreign and economic policies.

Accepting global warming and its impacts as an issue still leaves the question of how to deal with it. Of course, a simple answer is for businesses and consumers to change behaviors and purchases in order to reduce the rise in global temperatures.

But again, we’re left with the question of how – what would motivate businesses and consumers to do this?

One answer is concern for the planet. We can voluntarily alter our behavior and change the products and services we use in order to reduce environmental damage. Many people willingly pay more to drive a hybrid or all-electric vehicle so as to curtail carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

I accept global warming. I just say that the majority is natural causation. So, why would I do anything? The article from WRAL then gets into the “top down approach”, otherwise known as “Government telling you what to do, taking your money, limiting your freedom, choice, and liberty.” Then we get

These concerns have led to an alternative approach to curtailing global warming – the “bottom-up” approach. This approach begins with the premise that people don’t purposely engage in behavior that harms the environment.

Instead, their environmental harm is an unfortunate by-product of behavior that benefits them. For example, a person may charge their tech products with electricity that is generated by high CO2-emitting coal. This is not because they hate the environment. Instead, they are either unaware their electricity is generated from coal, or they have no alternative. (snip)

For decades, many economists have proposed a simple solution to this situation. Levy a fee on the pollution-creating behavior (using electricity generated from coal, driving a gasoline-powered vehicle, plus many others), with the fee approaching the environmental damage done by the behavior.

Um, that sure seems like a top down approach, since it would be Government implementing these carbon tax schemes (at least call them what they are, WRAL)

There is a possible solution. It’s called a refundable pollution fee. The fee will still be applied and collected. But it will also be refunded to those paying it, but on some basis other than the amount paid. One suggestion is to refund an equal amount to everyone paying the fee.

This is just a rewriting of the carbon dividend scheme, trying to make it palatable. The thing is, this is not voluntary in the least, and you won’t be getting all the money back. And the intent is to make people thank government for giving them some of the money back that was forcibly taken to cover the artificial increase in the cost of living.

You want to convince me? Practice what you preach. Start with WRAL giving up their use of fossil fueled vehicles, including helicopters, to gather the news. Stop using fossil fueled vehicles to deliver newspapers. Stop making newspapers, which kill trees. Run the WRAL headquarters only with renewables. At the end of the day, Warmists want to force Other People to take the climate crisis scam seriously via Government dictates.

Read: Say, What Will It Take To Make People And Businesses Comply To Stop Climate Apocalypse? »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 1, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible asphalt road causing the earth to boil, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bunkerville, with a post on Boston schools suspending testing for advanced learning due to too many whites and Asians.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove