One glance at the TV covering the blizzard on the East Coast reminds me of the children’s puzzle series “Where’s Waldo?”, only in this case, it should be “Where’s Al?” Indeed, where is our favorite Global Warming Climate Change cheerleader? Unless I miss my guess, he’s sitting in his mansion in Tennessee sipping fine cognac by a raging fire counting the money from his latest speaking engagement.
Anyone following the news knows that the data supporting Global Warming Climate Change is faked by scientists gunning for grant money and power. If that’s not enough, Copenhagen was nothing more than an attempt for various countries holding their hands out for money. And then what seems to be the stake in this vampire is the questioning of the IPCC’s credibility due to conflicts of interest. Yet Al still seems to still not have a clue that this horse is dying a very public death.
And the President, despite being up to his eyeballs in snow, still harps on passing Global Warming Climate Change legislation, aka, Cap and Trade. But if he can’t get it one way, then he’s going to do it another way. From Associated Press at cnsnews.com (h/t to America’s Watchtower):
Washington (AP) – The Obama administration on Monday proposed a new agency to study and report on the changing climate.
Also known as global warming, climate change has drawn widespread concern in recent years as temperatures around the world rise, threatening to harm crops, spread disease, increase sea levels, change storm and drought patterns and cause polar melting.
Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, announced NOAA will set up the new Climate Service to operate in tandem with NOAA’s National Weather Service and National Ocean Service.
So now we are funding a duplicate service that studies the same thing (weather) as the original service. Our tax dollars at work…
Global Warming Climate Change is way down on American’s priority list. So is health care reform. Again, to borrow from a previous campaign slogan:
It’s the economy, stupid!
Let’s deal with that after we shovel ourselves out from the latest Global Warming Climate Change fallout. But then again, green job creation is hitting a minor snag. Excerpts from The Heritage Foundation:
Green Jobs: Environmental Red Tape Cancels Out Job Creation
In the midst of a recession, costly environmental legislation is not an easy sell. For that reason, the Obama Administration and congressional proponents of an aggressive environmental agenda have tried to recast their policies as a boost to–rather than a drain on–the economy. From the stimulus package to pending global warming legislation to the Senate’s upcoming jobs bill, the latest mantra is green jobs–employment to be created by imposing various environmental measures.
In truth, the definition of a green job is highly subjective and can depend every bit as much on fads and fashions and political correctness as on any objective criteria. Of course, now that federal money is involved, various special interests are vying to characterize themselves as “green.”
Mandates (such as those in place requiring the use of ethanol in gasoline and proposed ones to set federal renewable electricity standards) kill jobs by raising energy costs. The only reason these alternative energy sources need to be mandated in the first place is that they are too expensive to compete otherwise. Thus, in addition to forcibly supplanting traditional energy jobs, renewable energy mandates raise energy costs and thus destroy jobs, especially in energy-intensive manufacturing.
President Obama has done many media events at wind turbine factories, boasting about the green jobs at each. However, for every federally created green job seen, there are unseen jobs that are destroyed.
What Has the Experience with Green Jobs Shown?
Before the U.S. expands its green jobs agenda, a look at the experiences of those nations that have already gone further down that road would be instructive.
As mentioned, Spain has likely destroyed more jobs than it has created with its extensive subsidies for wind and solar. Its unemployment rate, nearly 19 percent, is double that of the U.S. and does not suggest that green jobs can create prosperity. In Denmark, each wind energy job has cost $90,000 to $140,000 in subsidies, which is more than the jobs pay. In Germany, the figure is as high as $240,000. And the experience in Spain, Denmark, and Germany is that most of the green jobs created are temporary ones.
The global experience–that market interventions increase green employment but hurt the overall economy–may also apply in California. California stands out among the states as moving more aggressively in imposing a green economy. It also has unemployment considerably higher than the national average. Although several factors play a part in California’s economic problems, its environmental and energy policy–global warming measures, alternative energy mandates, other regulations that raise conventional energy prices–are likely part of the reason for the state’s overall economic malaise.
Yep, the quote for the day sums it up nicely – To rely on government is stupidity at best & insanity at worst. Might want to add is that we get to pay for it.