you are simply parroting the 1992 rio accord's
agenda21 whether you realize it or not.
individuals cannot be trusted to be good stewards of the environment.
so the government must take control by means of green regulation to pack people in big city centres of stacked sardine can ghettos, restrict their mobilty & dumb down the kids schooling, sound familiar?
so just how nany more of these gd accords do we reely need??
if the problem was strictly climate you would think the details could be worked out the first time with amendments every decade or so.
actually it could be set in motion without even so much as one polluting limo jet set fn accord.
(by a funny coincidence 1992 is when i parked my car while waiting to electrify it.)
but climate is simply a pretext, the bait to get you to swallow the hook.
and if anyone objects to the taste, well they're evil climate denying idiots.
that's the beauty of the scam, we waste our breath arguing while the real agenda marches relentlessly forward unabated.
listen not what they say they, look at what they do.
they being 'the men who spurred us on & sit in judgment of our wrong.'
remember when back in the 90's when these same imf et al assholes subsidized cutting down the rain forests?
why do you think they spent the big bucks to create this crisis in the first place?
they sure as hell aren't going let the crisis go to waste now.
idk perhaps you enjoy living as a serf tending to the needs of those living high on mount olympus.
alan said:
Toorbough ULL-Zeveigh said:
Inot a trump fanboi but he is correct when he sez it's all a money making scam.
i would add it's also about further eroding freedom & more government control.
any benefit to the environment is secondary & purely incidental.
Pollution is real. It is also a scam in that the main polluters don't see the costs of their pollution, but that cost is borne by others. Economists call this an externality. Externalities are the main weakness in capitalism, in this case where freedom to pollute is simply taking away from others the freedom to be pollution free, or the added costs to remain clean is put upon others, and the costs are not tracked or properly compensated. It is exactly such weaknesses where government control (regulation and taxation) makes excellent sense even in a strong Libertarian model (although it seems anti-libertarian on the surface). Getting the regulations right is a very difficult thing, but rest assured that unregulated capitalism will very much get it terribly wrong nearly always, and the government will be far less "bad" by comparison.
Fortunately those lower middle class voters, such as myself too, are not in charge of US industry. When solar on the roof costs less than the coal fired grid, they buy the solar. We just need to stop subsidizing the coal and oil. 
