Canada’s Prime Minister Submits Legislation Pushing Towards 2050 Net Zero

By William Teach November 21, 2020 – 7:09 am

Of course, there’s one little problem with these five year plans (Progressives (nice Fascists)/Modern Socialists really love their 5 year plans)

Canada sets out to enshrine 2050 net zero emissions goal in law
Justin Trudeau presented a bill to the Canadian parliament to set five-yearly carbon targets from 2030 to 2050, but was criticised for a lack of immediate action

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has presented a bill to commit Canada to cut its emissions to net zero by 2050 and set five-year targets to meet the goal.

The bill, called the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, follows an election pledged by Trudeau to set the country on a path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

The act, which was introduced to parliament on Thursday, establishes a legally binding process to set five-year emission reduction targets from 2030 and develop a credible plan to meet each commitment. If passed, future governments would have to report regularly on progress towards meeting the goals.

However, the bill does not set out how the government is planning to reduce emissions in the short term nor does it propose a new 2030 target.

Whoops. But, then, this is what most are doing, playing this “we’re going to have something going in 2030” game. Why? Because politicians need re-election, and crashing the economies and slapping massive restrictions on citizen’s lives while burdening them with a big cost of living increase won’t help them. They have to ease citizens into giving up their money and freedom.

Canada has failed to live up to its climate commitments in recent decades. It reneged on the Kyoto Protocol and prior to the pandemic was off track to meet its 2020 emissions target.

That’s pretty much every signatory of Kyoto and Paris

“What we see is that there is no plan at all. There is no plan for getting us to net zero. And it’s really just a game of smoke and mirrors,” Green Party leader Annamie Paul told reporters.

“There is only talk about accountability of a plan that will be developed at some future date,” she said, adding that it could take up to a year and a half under the bill for Canada to adopt a new 2030 target.

Did any reporter ask Annamie Paul, members of the Green Party, and members of the other parties pushing this stuff if they’ve given up their own use of fossil fuels and made their lives Net Zero?

Isabelle Turcotte, federal policy director at the Pembina Institute, said the legislation “will help Canada achieve its low-carbon energy potential”.

The bill, she said, “moves us past the vagaries of the election cycle with legal requirements on governments to achieve climate progress, a strong accountability framework provides much-needed regulatory certainty for businesses to confidently make investments needed today to create jobs”.

That makes it sound as if voters will never be able to change the policy if the disagree with it. That’s rather disturbing.

Read: Canada’s Prime Minister Submits Legislation Pushing Towards 2050 Net Zero »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Joan Walsh: Yes, Democrats Did Get Blown Out In The States

By William Teach November 21, 2020 – 6:54 am

Joan Walsh, hyper-lefty extraordinaire, takes a stab at rationalizing the horrible losses Democrats suffered in the states

How to Understand Democrats’ Disappointing Losses in State Legislatures

Joe Biden won the White House, overwhelmingly, but otherwise, since Election Day, the news for Democrats has been bleak. They failed to flip the Senate—though the Georgia runoffs could still give them a 50-50 tie, broken by Vice President Kamala Harris—and lost seats in the House of Representatives, where they had been projected to pad their majority. But nowhere was the news worse than at the state legislative level, where despite unprecedented investment by Democratic organizations and outside groups, and expectations that they’d flip from four to eight legislative bodies—or more, in a “blue wave” election—the party lost ground.

With surprising candor, Nicole Hobbs, cofounder of Every District, a state legislative organizing, fundraising, and data analysis group, wrote in an election post-mortem: “It was a bloodbath.”

I heard that word a lot. Also “shit show.” Most mild: “No way to sugarcoat it.”

The losses were everywhere. Not all races in all states are called, but there’s no way, even with the outstanding contests, that Democrats will flip chambers. Against all expectations, they lost the New Hampshire House and Senate. Activists hoped Democrats might pick up the Iowa and Minnesota houses; they lost five and seven seats, respectively. They seemed close to flipping both the Arizona House and Senate; despite Biden’s win, they gained only one Senate seat there. They thought they had a decent shot of flipping the North Carolina House and/or Senate; they lost an estimated four seats in the House while gaining one in the Senate. After winning 12 seats in the Texas House in 2018, there was optimism Democrats could flip it by winning nine this year; they won one.

They were given good odds of winning the Michigan House, which seems reasonable in hindsight, since Biden won the state by almost 150,000 votes; instead, zero gains. Biden also won Wisconsin, though more narrowly, but thanks to hugely gerrymandered districts, Democrats lost two seats in the state Senate, while winning two in the House. And he won Pennsylvania, but Democrats lost three seats in the House and apparently one in the Senate.

So, pretty much bad for Dems, right? What happened?

The number-one explanation: Donald Trump had long coattails, even in defeat—and Biden had short ones, even in victory. “That’s what people just didn’t see coming,” says Carolyn Fiddler of Daily Kos, long an evangelist for Democrats to pay more attention to statehouse races. “Trump wasn’t on the ballot in 2018. We don’t know what would have happened if he was.” Everyone I interviewed agreed. And the suburban “blue wave” that helped lift Biden to victory? It did not carry Democratic state candidates (or, to be honest, a lot of US House or Senate seats). “Republicans heavily voted down-ballot, where Democrats did not again,” says Joanna Cattanach, who ran and narrowly lost a second time for a Texas state senate seat in Dallas County. “And we saw a slew of ticket splitters.” I heard that all across the country. It will take a lot more district-level analysis to be sure.

So, wait, Trump had long coattails, which provided destruction in the states (and, let’s not forget all the taken House seats), yet, somehow, he lost those same states? Might it have something to do with the huge deviation in president only ballots, a giant jump that looks like, dare I say, fraud?

As with the disappointing House and Senate outcomes, some Democrats complain that the Biden campaign focused too much on Trump and not enough on the devolution of the entire Republican Party into a racist, antidemocratic swamp. As Ron Brownstein put it in a must-read Atlantic piece, “Rather than presenting Trump as the culmination of Republican policies and values, Biden consistently portrayed him as an aberration; many strategists on both sides believe that made it easier for voters to oppose Trump but still back Republicans in House and Senate races.”

Maybe people wanted Trumpism without Trump. Would it be wrong to say that Democrats focused too much on defeating Trump, legally and illegally, and forgot so much down ballot? Anyhow, Joan continues providing excuses and Excuses. One thing to remember, Obama, despite a big win and easy win in his 2nd election, lost a lot of House, Senate, and state positions. Of course, he was a master campaigner, was likeable, didn’t seem mentally confused, and didn’t win by as much a margin as Biden, which seems weird, right?

Read: Joan Walsh: Yes, Democrats Did Get Blown Out In The States »

Posted in Democrats, Elections | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Cities Full Of Warmists Who Are Hypocrites Must Lead The Way Or Something

By William Teach November 20, 2020 – 4:29 pm

Big cities tend to lean heavily Left, which means they are chock full of climate cultists, always yammering for Someone Else to be burdened with taxes, fees, and restrictions. Yet, so few of these cultists want anything done to their own lives. Perhaps it’s time for them to be forced to practice what they preach, because we need experimental groups, right?

Cities must actively shape development to combat climate change

We are in a critical decade, with a last shot to avoid the worst consequences of crises such as climate change and biodiversity loss. A recent report from the United Nations concluded that the world has failed to meet a single target on stopping biodiversity loss since targets were agreed upon in 2010. Forty percent of the world’s plants are under threat of extinction, and humanity has wiped out over 60 percent of the population of vertebrate species since 1970. When it comes to climate change, we are crossing tipping points at an alarming rate. Wildfires and storms are ravaging large parts of the world as Greenland’s melting ice sheet has passed the “point of no return” and may be destined to disappear. Forty percent of the Amazon rainforest is on the brink of shifting from rainforest to savanna.

We’ve been told that Doom is coming for 30 years. So far? Nothing

The COVID pandemic is testing us in unprecedented ways, giving us a more tangible understanding of the importance of resilience, and of the scale of challenges we need to address as a society. We no longer can ignore our collective responsibility to change things. The time to act is now — for all of us.

Fortunately, many of us are in a position to have real impact just because of where we live. Do you live in a city? So does 55 percent of the world’s population — and urbanization continues to increase worldwide. This is significant, because cities are the main driver of many impacts described above. In our linear economy, cities act as global resource drains — devouring materials and energy from the hinterlands and spewing out waste and emissions. Although cities only occupy 3 percent of the earth’s land surface, they consume 75 percent of global resources and are responsible for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.

Cities are what we call a “leverage point” — a place in the system where positive change can have a disproportionately beneficial impact. If we redesign our cities to be circular, regenerative and equitable, not only can we eliminate most of the impact humanity is causing globally — we also can create a future to look forward to.

This Green Utopia yammering continues on for a while, but, yes, these leftist cities should be forced to change. Let’s see how they like having their fossil fueled travel taken away. The loss of revenue from doing away with airports and visitor centers and visitors. Running museums and such with solar panels. Have fun walking up 20 flights or more of stairs because elevators are unreliable. And heat and AC will barely be usable. Working on your laptop by candlelight. Skyrocketing prices and taxes.

And these people who vote for this will not be allowed to leave for areas that are not doing this. They seemed to like losing their freedom during COVID lockdowns, so, they can just deal with lockdowns for the climate crisis (scam).

Cities are no longer one-way sinks for resources. All valuable resources that enter the city — from building materials to food to products — are collected and reused or remanufactured into new, high-value goods within the city’s borders. Cities are producers instead of just consumers, with new green industries flourishing and serving as the basis for resilient, regional economies.

Well, good luck growing your own food, making clothes, etc, in these big big cities.

Hundreds of cities around the world already have made the pledge to become circular, carbon neutral and resilient. But city governments can’t achieve this alone — they need the involvement and participation of citizens to make it a reality. We all need to become “city makers” and do our part to evolve our cities toward visions such as these.

It’s real easy to make pledges, right? Keeping ones like this? Not so easy. Why do all these Warmists not want to do this stuff in their own backyards?

Read: Cities Full Of Warmists Who Are Hypocrites Must Lead The Way Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 20, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is the notion of eating meat which is bad for ‘climate change’ and should be restricted for Other People, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on instant karma for a guy stealing a Trump flag.

Read: If All You See… »

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

California, Ohio Institute Nighttime COVID Curfews Or Something

By William Teach November 20, 2020 – 10:30 am

Apparently, COVID is more dangerous overnight

(The Columbus Dispatch) Saying “this is not some game, this is life and death,” Gov. Mike DeWine began a series of airport news conferences Wednesday pleading with Ohioans to comply with an overnight curfew in an attempt to ward off a record spike in coronavirus cases.

“We are in a critical, dangerous time … we have to look at this as a time of crisis,” DeWine said in Toledo while speaking about the still-to-be issued order confining Ohioans to their homes between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. for three weeks starting Thursday.

“Stay home. Don’t go out,” he said. “I’m asking every Ohioan to find a way to pull back a bit … pull back from your contacts with other people.”

He doesn’t really say why there’s a curfew for these hours. He just requires Compliance

California imposes nighttime COVID-19 curfew but some resist

California is imposing a nighttime curfew as its coronavirus figures soar but it will lean heavily on voluntary compliance and sheriffs of some counties say they won’t enforce it.

What officials are calling a limited stay-at-home order requires people who are not on essential errands to stay home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. starting Saturday. The order will last until Dec. 21 but could be extended if disease trends don’t improve.

The curfew is less strict than the near-total ban on nonessential business and travel that Gov. Gavin Newsom imposed in March and which he credited with flattening the rate of COVID-19 cases, despite a summer peak.

But along with many other states, California is now seeing surges in virus infections, hospitalizations and deaths that threaten to overwhelm its health care system.

This order applies to 41 of 58 California counties. And, again, there is no real rationale for the why’s. The majority of people are going to be home anyhow. Bars aren’t really open yet in California yet, except those who can do it outside. Where else are people going to go? Most restaurants do not stay open that late. Where else are people going? It sounds more like, dare I write, an attempt to see what more compliance governors can get out of citizens.

Officials in Fresno and Placer counties say they won’t enforce state rules, and two Republican state lawmakers are trying to rally 14 Northern California counties to formally call for a local approach that emphasizes reopenings.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva has said he wouldn’t enforce a nighttime curfew for restaurants and nonessential retail businesses in the nation’s most populous county, where cases more than doubled in the last two weeks and hospitalizations rose 30%.

The county has seen more than 350,000 cases and nearly 7,400 deaths.

Villanueva tweeted that since the first stay at home orders were issued in March, “we have focused on education and voluntary compliance, with criminal enforcement measures being an extreme last resort.”

Wait, wait, an area that is primarily full of Democratic Party voters is having a hard time complying with all the mask, handwashing, and social distancing measures? Huh.

Read: California, Ohio Institute Nighttime COVID Curfews Or Something »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

AOC And Progressive Allies Tell Biden He Best Keep His Word On Climate Crisis (scam) Action

By William Teach November 20, 2020 – 8:01 am

Yes, this would be the same Alexandria Ocasio Cortez who introduced the Green New Deal almost 2 years ago come February, and has never demanded it be considered in committee, much less voted on. Also present was Senator Ed Markey, the sponsor in the Senate, who voted “present”.

AOC, Lawmakers Call on Biden Administration to “Keep Its Promise” on Addressing Climate Change

A group of current and incoming representatives – plus one sitting senator – reiterated their demands on Thursday that the incoming Biden administration put forward massive, progressive action on climate change.

Democratic Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ro Khanna were joined by representatives-elect Cori Bush, Jamaal Bowman and Mondaire Jones outside DNC headquarters alongside climate activists to push for action that addresses the concerns of everyone in the United States — not just white Americans. (there’s a tweet embedded in article of them Demanding Biden have a corporate free cabinet….good luck)

The representatives were joined by Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, who was among those who signed on to the Green New Deal in 2019, and who agreed that climate change is also an issue of racial justice. Markey said his incoming colleagues represent “this revolution changing the way in which people see the issue of climate change in our lives.”

Markey further called on the president-elect to use the funding to fix “the obvious reality that Black and brown communities have always breathed different air than white, suburban communities in the United States of America.”

Weird that they breathe such bad air in Democratic Party run cities….of course, that has zero to do with ‘climate change’.

The group argued that minority communities are affected by climate issues at a much higher rate than white Americans, saying it is a matter of life and death.

Of course they do: have to keep those black and brown people fearful and Dependent on the Democrats for the votes, though, Dems never actually do something to resolve issues. If they did, there would be no way to keep those minorities under their thumb.

On Thursday, activists and lawmakers stressed that the president-elect had previously pledged 40% of his climate budget will go towards minority communities—and they plan to hold him to it come January.

“This is an urgent matter that we have to deal with. We are living in a climate catastrophe,” said Congressman-elect Jamaal Bowman of New York’s 16th district. “Biden has pledged a $2 trillion investment in environmental justice, and 40 percent of that has been pledged to districts like mine across the country.”

“That 40 percent has to be part of a green new deal that rebuilds Black and brown communities across this country,” Bowman continued.

Isn’t this what’s called “extortion”? They voted for Biden and now Biden has to pay up. Or, is this more of a shakedown? Anyhow, when do all these Democrats practice what they preach and make their own lives carbon neutral?

Ocasio-Cortez, who served on Biden’s climate policy panel during his campaign, assured viewers that they are making progress on addressing climate change. Describing Biden and his team as “decent, kind, and honorable,” Ocasio-Cortez added: “I don’t want anyone here to think we are not winning. We are winning. We are going to secure the tenets of a Green New Deal.”

Read: AOC And Progressive Allies Tell Biden He Best Keep His Word On Climate Crisis (scam) Action »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Climahypocrites, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Tucker: Sidney Powell Needs To Show The Evidence, News Media Is A Disgrace

By William Teach November 20, 2020 – 7:39 am

Did you watch the press conference with Rudy Giuliani and his folks yesterday? I didn’t, was at the gym. I did read the recaps. And the media was an utter partisan disgrace. Within hours of making lots of claims, much of it backed up by actual evidence and affidavits, the Credentialed Media was out with hit pieces and “fact checks”. They spent zero time investigating the claims. The same media which spent 4 years on Russia Russia Russia

Tucker Carlson: Time for Sidney Powell to show us her evidence

China Votes BidenOn Thursday, Rudy Giuliani and a number of President Trump’s other lawyers held a press conference on the topic of voter fraud. If you didn’t actually see it, you’ve probably heard about it by now.

Giuliani, along with former federal prosecutor called Sidney Powell and a number of others, alleged that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump. To demonstrate that, they exhibited some of what they found after two weeks of investigating. The presentation went on for 90 minutes with many different threads, about which more anon.

How you viewed it depended largely on who you voted for. Trump voters seemed hopeful that it might change the election results. The left and virtually every single person in all of the news media immediately dismissed it as an embarrassing clown show as well as a threat to the republic. That’s right: the very same people who swore that Vladimir Putin’s agents controlled the U.S. government called it a conspiracy theory.

A lot of Americans believe this election was rigged. They’re not saying that because they’re crazy and they’re not just saying it because they’re mad. They mean it. And that’s a potentially fatal problem for this country. Elections aren’t merely “central to democracy”, elections are democracy. Voting is the way the public expresses its will. It’s all people have. If elections don’t work, our entire system doesn’t work.

Yes, yes, we aren’t a pure democracy, I know, but, we vote, and we should have trust in our voting system. A little bit of cheating is something expected: massive amounts is not. We should be concerned with the allegations. We took time to investigate Russia Russia Russia, why not this?

But the media don’t want to know. They’re not interested. If you watched the coverage after the press conference today, you saw credentialed reporters, some of whom we know and like, actually, refuse even to acknowledge it. No mention whatsoever of the contents of what they described as “what he says are sworn affidavits.” Giuliani says that the Jacob affidavit has been made public, but they can’t be bothered to check. Instead, they launched new editorials about how dishonest and crazy Rudy Giuliani is, as if their job was to rebut Rudy Giuliani. But that’s not their job. Their job is to explain what just happened, preferably with some detail so that viewers at home can make up their minds. They didn’t do that. Behavior like this does not help anyone and diminishes the news media’s tiny remaining reserve of credibility. It certainly doesn’t inform the public

Why, exactly, was the press afforded an extra protection in the 1st Amendment, along with every state Constitution I’ve seen, if not to investigate government malfeasance with fear of reprisal? What they do is covered by Free Speech, right? Right now they are complicit in election fraud, and have killed themselves even more. It’s a disgrace, and they’re a disgrace. They refused to investigate anything.

That CNN “fact check” was published on WRAl at 330pm. Rudy’s show ended around 2pm or so, right? Meaning that said fact check was being writing while the press conference was going on or not long after. Meaning that CNN took zero time to investigate. That’s why they have “reporters”.

Anyhow

All of which brings us to the bombshell at the center of today’s press conference that was delivered by Powell, who also serves as Gen. Mike Flynn’s lawyer. For more than a week, Powell has been all over conservative media with the following story: This election was stolen by a collection of international leftists who manipulated vote tabulating software in order to flip millions of votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. The o”ther day on television, Powell said of Trump that when the fraud is finally uncovered, I think we’ll find he had at least 80 million votes.” In other words, rigged software stole about seven million votes in this election.

On Sunday night, “Tucker Carlson Tonight” texted her after watching one of her segments. What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history. Millions of votes stolen in a day, democracy destroyed, the end of our centuries-old system of self-government. Not a small thing.

Powell is not responding. She has not shown her evidence as of yet. She told Tucker’s people to stop contacting her. Here’s the thing: show the evidence. The People need to see it. And she and Rudy need to actually do something with it. It’s meaningless to say you have it and do nothing with it. The media won’t give it any credence like they did with the supposed evidence Democrat representatives like Eric Swalwell and and Adam Schiff said they had for 4 years and never showed. The media never demanded they show it. If Rudy and Powell want to show that Trump won the election so he is inaugurated (again) in January 2021, they have to show the evidence, and it must be conclusive.

Read: Tucker: Sidney Powell Needs To Show The Evidence, News Media Is A Disgrace »

Posted in Current Affairs, Elections, Journalistic Malpractice | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

You Can Save The World’s Climate Fever By Sending Fewer Emails

By William Teach November 19, 2020 – 3:00 pm

The oceans are acidifying and doom is coming, and it’s all your fault

Climate change: Can sending fewer emails really save the planet?

Are you the type of person who always says thank-you? Well, if it’s by email, you should stop, according to UK officials looking at ways to save the environment.

The Financial Times reports that we may all soon be encouraged to send one fewer email a day, cutting out “useless” one-line messages – such as “thanks”.

Doing so “would save a lot of carbon”, one official involved in next year’s COP26 climate summit in Glasgow said.

But would it really make a huge difference?

The Financial Times report says the officials promoting this idea referred to a press release from renewable electricity firm Ovo Energy from one year ago.

It claimed that if every British person sent one fewer thank-you email a day, it would save 16,433 tonnes of carbon a year, equivalent to tens of thousands of flights to Europe.

The problem, however, is that even if the sums involved roughly worked out, it would still be a splash in the pond.

The UK’s annual greenhouse gas emissions were 435.2 million tonnes in 2019 – so the amount in question here is about 0.0037% of the national picture. And that’s if every single British person reduced their email output.

Yeah, but, see, what if we all also didn’t send the email that precipitated the thank you? And didn’t send a “you’re quite welcome, my pleasure” one? What if all the news outlets stopped sending emails to coordinate all their climate messaging?

“The reality is that a lot of the system will still have impact, whether or not the email is sent,” Prof Preist explains.

“Your laptop will still be on, your wi-fi will still be on, your home internet connection will still be on, the wider network will still use roughly the same amount of energy even with a reduction in volume.

Next up, they’ll restrict the amount of time your laptop, desktop, smartphone, and tablet can be on and connected to the WiFi, and a way to put your router into standby when not in use.

Rather than worrying about relatively low-impact emails, some researchers suggest we should turn our attention to services such as game and video-streaming and cloud storage which have a much larger effect.

But the topic is immensely complicated, and there is a debate about how estimates should be calculated – and who should be responsible for it.

Well, good luck with that one. You’ve lost most Millennials and GenZ, and a goodly chunk of GenX, who were really the big ones doing that stuff. Have fun with your cult.

Oh, and what’s the carbon footprint of all these climate crisis (scam) articles from climate cult outlets?

Read: You Can Save The World’s Climate Fever By Sending Fewer Emails »

Posted in Global Warming, Web/Tech | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 19, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is what could possibly be an oil rig, but, even if it isn’t, it is a reminder that oil for Other People is bad, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on Dems showing that they just cannot move on from Trump.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

China Joe Up For Forgiving $10,000 In Student Loan Debt Per Student

By William Teach November 19, 2020 – 10:30 am

Considering how much debt so many kids accrued in obtaining their mostly worthless degrees, how does this help?

Joe Biden supports ‘immediately’ canceling some student loan debt, penalizing American taxpayers

Former Vice President Joe Biden declared Monday that, as president, he would move to ensure that Americans with student loans have some of their debt “immediately” — by magic, apparently — wiped away.

Outstanding student loan debt currently stands at more than $1.5 trillion.

Biden was asked by a reporter on Monday whether student loan forgiveness is part of his economic agenda. Biden responded affirmatively, no doubt pleasing the Democratic Party’s far-left members.

“It’s holding people up,” Biden said of student loan debt, the New York Times reported. “They’re in real trouble. They’re having to make choices between paying their student loans and paying their rent, those kinds of decisions. It should be done immediately.”

Biden voiced support for a proposal from House Democrats that would forgive $10,000 of student loan debt per borrower.

“Immediate $10,000 forgiveness of student loans, helping people up there in real trouble,” Biden said, Fox News reported.

I guess that would be nice, but, what of the idiots who accrued $50K or more to get a degree in something ending in Studies or 5th Century Art or something? Let’s not forget that Democrats run most colleges and mostly set the costs of colleges. They’re they ones charging $200 for a text book that’s a quarter the size of a Steven King book which costs $30. And the ones teaching at colleges, pushing the kids into Victimhood for the loans they voluntarily signed, instead of working to pay for the degree or getting a scholarship.

House Democrats originally proposed forgiving $10,000 of student loan debt per borrower as part of their proposal for a second COVID-19 relief bill, which had a price tag of $3 trillion, making it the most expensive bill in history. The legislation was never considered in the Republican-controlled Senate because of its cost.

They scaled that back to only those who were “economically distressed” on the day before Trump declared the COVID emergency on March 12th, but, either way, is it any wonder that Republicans would not take the measure up?

Contrary to what progressives like Ocasio-Cortez claim, “canceling debt” is not something that actually exists. Lawmakers could remove a borrower’s liability for re-paying the debt, but the debt will be shifted onto someone.

In the case of federal student loans, the burden would be further shifted onto taxpayers.

Let’s not forget that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, ie, Obamacare, made the federal government as the backers of all student loans, at which point the student debt exploded. So, if they “forgive” the debt, the federal government is on the hook, which means taxpayers are on the hook. Where will the money come from? And what happens next? What of the people who are in college now, who will demand forgiveness? And you can bet that homeowners, car owners, boat owners, people with credit card debt, etc, will demand the same thing. Some might be tongue in cheek, some might be real.

Read: China Joe Up For Forgiving $10,000 In Student Loan Debt Per Student »

Posted in Democrats, Joe Biden | 19 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove