You are a true believer. Now tell me how to address conflicting climate goals. 
MIT and Harvard Scientists Say Global Warming Causes More CO2
This morning I did a post on climate change. Please see MIT and Harvard Scientists Say Global Warming Causes More CO2, Not the Opposite
My post brought out the usual barrage of nonsense, all of it missing my key point.
I added an addendum to the post, but then decided it needs to stand alone to stop the bickering about what percentage of clime change is manmade.
For this post let’s all assume that 100 percent of climate change is manmade.
Everyone put your head into that belief, at least for the moment. OK. Mish is now a true believer and so are you, for the duration of this post.
In return for accepting the science, I impose requited reading. It will take all of seven minutes to play the video.
Brilliant Acceptance of Climate Change
Please Consider an Absolutely Brilliant Speech by British Satirist, Konstantine Kisin
You cannot comment or object to this post unless you play that video. After playing the video, please address the conflicts.
I added the section below on conflicting goals as part of an addendum to my previous post, but I expand further on my addendum here.
Conflicting Goals
- Fix the environment
- Force the world to fix the environment
- Buy US
- Build US
- Appease the unions
- Appease the environmentalists who don’t want mines in the US
- All of the above needs to happen at a cost that consumers are willing to pay without political backlash
- The conflicting regulations are so intense that nothing is getting done.
Explanations Needed None Delivered
No one has explained yet where we get the minerals for batteries, or at what cost to the environment when we have little to no mining or refining capacity in the US.
No one has factored in the carbon requirements of mining whether in China or the US.
No one has factored in grid upgrade costs.
No one has figured out how to appease consumers who want cheaper cars and the unions who accurately see that EVs are going to reduce jobs.
We have global goals but China has refused to go along. No one has looked ahead to what happens when India and Africa industrialize.
In regard to point seven, the administration has allocated tens of billions of dollars to put in chargers, and in two years has put in a grand total of seven. The same is happening with high-speed internet mandates of the preposterous Inflation Reduction Act.
It is is tough enough to have one direct goal and get it done. It is virtually impossible when you have eight conflicting parts and you need the whole rest of the world to cooperate.
China is the leader in EVs hooray! But it is still building coal plants to charge the cars and refine the minerals.
The EU is backing off climate goals when the alarmists say we need to double or triple them or the word will end as we know it.
Reasonable Things We Could Do
- Stop setting ridiculous conflicting mandates that make it impossible to get anything done
- Encourage more hybrids
- Mothball coal plants for natural gas
- Allow more imports of EVs from China
- Rapidly promote nuclear
- Scrap buy America
- Have no more than enough kids to hold the global population steady
I am in favor of all of those. But guess what. Biden isn’t, Harris isn’t, China isn’t, Trump isn’t, and the EU isn’t.
The second problem is even if we did all of that, it would not be enough according to the alarmists.
They want us to eat bugs, restrict driving, ban cows, force us to live in ecologically sustainable cities, and address income inequality. Sadly, that is not an exaggeration.
Meanwhile, please note that high priestess Kamala Harris has backed off fracking bans and tells us she will not take away your internal combustion union or gas stove.
Bickering Over the Wrong Things
Bickering over the percentage of manmadeness won’t solve anything.
So for the life of this post, I am 100% in agreement that climate change is 100% manmade. The bickering has ended.
Now please tell us how to fix the damn problem and get the US to go along.
After you explain that, and at what cost, please tell us how to get China, India, and the rest of the word to go along.
Meanwhile, might I propose we: Stop the incessant fearmongering, stop the know-it-all comeuppance on 100 percent manmadeness, and act on some of my “Reasonable Things We Could Do” list where there is general agreement.
When people are struggling to put food on the table, no one gives a damn about idiotic, constantly-repeated (and wrong) projections that the world will end in 10 years.
Last year, I commented Don’t Worry, It Will Only Cost $131 Trillion to Address Climate Change
It’s not a solution to say all we need is $130 trillion or whatever, unless you also explain where we get that $130 trillion, where and how we get the minerals, how much inflation that would add, and why it would be politically acceptable to the world, when the EU, China, and even Kamala Harris is backing off climate goals.
For those who disagree, please tell us how to fix the damn problem, get the US and entire world to go along, in a politically acceptable way, and at what cost, or shut up.
Technology has not found us a solution yet we are trying to do what is not yet possible to do. It’s going to drive us into civil and world wars that will make things worse.
I agree that humans have greatly contributed to increasinly negative effects of climate change. There is no one simple fix. But here is what i propose we consider.
1. We accept that all people deserve to have a decent life – with enough food, a decent place to live, with access to quality education and quality health care.
2. I know some will have to dig deep for this but, we each need to recognize no one of us is better or more deserving that than anyone else.
3. We need to get over the idea that there is one religion that rules them all. Everyone has there own path to God/Goddes/Spirit however you define it. If there are 8 or 9 billion or so people on the planet then there are 8 or 9 billion religions.
4. Recognize that quality of life is applicable to ALL beings on thhe planet. Including animals and plants and inscets and even the earth its self (yes that means dirt and rocks and water, etc.). These all have conscioiusness and rights.
5. And here’s the big one, and the hardest one for people to wrap there minds around: We need to dispense with economies based on the exchange of goods for money and the idea that money has any real value. This system is probably the foundational element that has led to all the problems we are grappeling with now. The profit motive has created the issues of class/caste, whatever you want to call it, but it is the othering of people, individuals and entire races in some cases. Having more money does not make you better than anyone else, No Kings or Queens.
It also drives massive over production of goods, which leads to the over prouction of energy and the explotation of resources that is creating the climate problem. And let us not forget these things have underpinned, for centuries, all of the wars (big causes of pollution in themselevs) as well as genocides large and small, and not just of people.
So how about we start at the root and begin discussing how manage ourselves, our needs and share our resources with others so we all have what we need for a good life. And not focus on how to turn a profit.
George Carlin had a name for you if you think we have a significant effect on climate. You won’t like it but it’s true!
Use Mish’s guidelines, rather than giving your own unworkable ones. Each one of your points is arguable and is in the eye of the beholder. There’s no definition of decent life, deserving, one religion, quality of life, or economies that the world will ever agree on. For example, I think my grandson is more deserving of a “decent life” (however I define it) than your grandson. I reject your premise from the start and my viewpoint is multiplied by 8 billion people around the world.
Simplest Test in the world:
If the LIARS (politicians, tyrants, etc) are promoting, selling, pushing, shoving it down a free-man’s throat: It’s BULLCRAP.
Thats all you need to know.
I’m all for less kids. We could start by abolishing the money people get from government for having kids, including the child tax credit and the free school meals. If you have kids you should buy their food.
Incentives to have children? Kids breathe out co2, drive cars and consume resources.
“Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they do not want their illusions to be destroyed” Friedrich Nietzsche
It would surely be most helpful to re-direct some funds from inefficient renewables into research aimed at the development of the next generation of carbon capture strategies. Fertilising the ocean with iron oxide and other nutrients which results in a massive carbon-capturing phytoplankton bloom which ultimately sinks with its carbon load to the ocean floor has been one such promising strategy. One researcher claimed that with a single ship-load of iron dust he could start a new ice-age….
https://web.whoi.edu/ocb-fert/
Nothing like weird sh%t, to make up for dumb sh%t….
Never a shortage of look-at-me yahoos on the make, stacking one pile of nonsense atop another, in the #DumbAge.
Talk about the best way to destroy the ocean and all the other ecosystems for a BS “climate change” ideology.
My ex is a wealthy, “Anthropogenic” (human-caused) climate change true believer.
When I had heard enough whining about the issue of “humans causing the climate to change and we need to do something about it”, I confronted her with some solutions she could immediately implement: when she was going to stop her globe-trotting vacations (flying on huge carbon-spewing jets), stop her internal-combustion fueled road trips to all 4 corners of the USA, quit wearing and buying petro-chemical based clothing and shoes for her hiking and skiing expeditions, stop throwing lavish (wasteful, co2 producing) parties and serving delicious steaks (gleaned from prodigiously flatulent, methane-producing bovines), buy an EV, implement solar power on her house, seek out a few homeless or migrant (illegal “newcomers”) roommates to more efficiently and selflessly use the 4000 square foot villa she owns, stop using her hot tub, steam room and sauna, volunteer for Earth Day clean-up efforts, etc, etc..
I did not get an answer.
I believe that the arrogant, leftist, self loathing, human caused global-warming hypocrites want a magical fix where they make no sacrifices (or, someone else sacrifices), there is no change to their life style and no pain.
Or, at the very minimum, they will not make meaningful sacrifices until EVERYONE is forced to make the same sacrifices.
That is basically communism.
So, they mindlessly vote for politicians that promise them just that.
They are delusional.
Even if they believe in human caused global warming/climate change, they usually will never change their lifestyles.
Virtue signaling about the issue is about all they are willing to do…
So, after 2 years of that BS, I exited the insanity.
She is not an evil person. I believe that behavior is a sign of mental illness and narcism.
I will not include that type of person in my circle of friends.
exactly correct. however i think you miss that human primates are very good at being hypocrites and virtue signaling. no party has a monopoly on these qualities. never have, in history of humanity. study some anthropology and learn what makes our species tick. we are all hypocrites. don’t fool yourself.
No doubt about that.
BUT: the left leaning portion of our country tends to feel the need to FORCE behavior changes (communism).
While the other portion tends to allow people to make their own decisions on behavior and way of life (libertarianism).
“While the other portion tends to allow people to make their own decisions on behavior and way of life (libertarianism).”
All one percent of them.
The rest ALL being full on totalitarian boot stompers by now. Only difference between them, being tiny, almost unmeasurable differences in exactly which Dear Leader they’ll stomp for, and what form of; invariably utterly nonsensical and childish; favorite delusion gets their stomping-feet moving.
My favorite hypocrite is the chicken hawk war monger. During baby Bush a web site was published to record how various war mongers dodged the draft. I think its gone, something like chickenhawk.com
That, and pretend-to-be “freedom”/”free market” “lovers”/”believers” sufficiently devoid of elementary logical aptitude to “yabutt… we need a Fed, and the finaaancial syyyystem” “and force people to pay taxes to buy bombs for Israel and Ukraine and who knows what…”and, like, you know…, yeah, yeah, yeah!!!
It’s insulting having to share continent with either kind; every one of them.
There is NOTHING any individual (or group of individuals) in the US can do to amount to anything. The roller coaster is all downhill from here because of APAC and Africa.
Start with getting New York City to go along.
Went to pick up someone at LaGuardia airport yesterday.
Drove past Citi Field. What a Traffic jam as cars backed up so as to go to stadium for a baseball game.
Would venture all that Global warming story just did not measure up to going to see a post season game.
For a moment thought it was a Trump rally but had not heard of it. So it was about baseball.
To my mind, the “lowest hanging fruit” would be replacing coal fired electric plants with either natural gas or nuclear, preferably the latter. There are several very encouraging nuclear designs that have been developed over the last couple of decades.
I would focus on hybrids rather than EV’s, as they are approximately 30-50% better for fuel economy and are more attractive to car buyers.
Start with those; that gets the ball rolling.
“To my mind, the “lowest hanging fruit” would be replacing coal fired electric plants with either natural gas or nuclear,”
Until gas and Uranium gets scarce….
In any world characterized by scarcity of resources: There exists no possible way to create and sustain any lifeform which will not make use of ALL energy resources available to them at any given level of technological sophistication. First the lowest hanging “prime cuts.” Then, as those dry up, less and less “ideal” ones. Nothing will simply be left in the ground on purpose, while people starve and freeze to death.
You can create a grand plan all you want. it’s still delusional to think you can decree global warming away. The simple things that we could do, we don’t. We can’t even balance a budget, but we’re gonna stop global warming?
The more delusional solution is a worldwide coup of socialistic and communistic authoritarianism to solve the problem.. Its still just another delusion!
It’s all about power, propaganda and delusions, global warming remain. All the simpler things would could do, we don’t, because of delusions.
3rd world mass invasion of people having a dozen kids from 3 concurrent wives, all of them adopting 1st world consumption lifestyles is the only manmade eco-disaster.
As I expected most of the comments here were from nonsensical denialists, ignorant (willfully or not) of the facts about climate change. First, there is not a giant fix out there that could be enacted to solve everything (if only China would go along). Maintaing a livable world is a long process not a fix. Second, there are things that we can do. Baby steps. They will add up in the long run without causing too much pain. Third, it is not a question of jobs and profits vs climate. A smart policy can mutually support both. But we have to smart and commited. Fourth, there must be a tax on emissions. Start it off tiny and grow it slowly but in the long run there must be a cost associated with producing CO2 and CH4 emissions. It is kind of absurd how cheap it is to ship stuff across the planet. There should be a small tax on shipping that approximately reflects emissions. Finally, I ask the denialists: Do you really think that this is some sort of hoax? That this is all made up to further some other cause that you diagree with? Thank you MIsh for at least being serious about it.
Climate change is not a hoax and I think all agree. The climate has been changing since the earth was formed and will be changing till it ends. The hoax is the government collecting taxes in an effort to solve the problem when they can’t even balance a budget. As Mish discussed let’s work on some details and specific items rather than banter around Climate Change like it is something new.
all planets have climatic change. take a look at the gigantic storm that has been brewing on jupiter forever……..visible from earth.
If climate change is real, then the sensible thing to do is to start with the low hanging fruit:
Get rid of private jets, decrease in military and stop the endless wars, defund/ dump NASA, reduce golf courses, etc….
Until and unless these very simple steps are enacted, I call BS on the entire narrative.
Mish. Climate alarmists don’t have any critical thinking abilities. So, unfortunately, you’re article will go way over their heads. They only know “climate change bad, climate change caused by humans, humans bad”. That’s it.
I perceive that most climate alarmists are gullible, who believe that if we are climate and environment virtuous then the climate will not exceed 2.5 degrees increase and will escape apocalypse. The minority of climate alarmists know better but use it as an umbrella in pursuing another goal. My guess at that other goal is that they are profoundly opposed to the negatives of fossil fuel extraction, processing, transport and use. Some of them may also be members of Negative Population Growth. In my opinion both sets have given up on conflicting goal #7, democratic self-government. If they can stop all advanced energy technology they don’t care if substitutes are ready or not, and they don’t care if economic collapse and mass death result. Like Thomas Frank, they put the right things in motion and it is our opposition to them and fault if those things don’t work out.
In my opinion the first six conflicting goals are doable, if you can persuade people to embrace a 300 years ago lifestyle. It may require a smaller population.
Mish wrote about the alarmists “They want us to eat bugs, restrict driving, ban cows, force us to live in ecologically sustainable cities, and address income inequality. Sadly, that is not an exaggeration.”
I consider “… to eat bugs” an exaggeration. In that brave new world we won’t have to eat bugs. But it will be long on rice and beans, with only an occasional pigeon, squirrel or rabbit to flavor it. “Restrict driving?” – More so than that, it will cease. As for “… live in ecologically sustainable cities” I consider that misunderstood. When the brave new world arrives most of us will leave the cities, like Cambodians did in 1975, and take up a life as peasants in the country, growing food. Big Ag will have ceased to exist, and farm productivity will have taken a big hit. Hopefully we can escape the death toll Cambodians suffered 1975 to 1979. (Or maybe the greens have no problem with that many people dying in order to reach their goals.)
So what do we sell to the Chinese? Is their demand for superhero movies large enough to pay for the physical products we want?
Colonize Mars. Plenty of new space.
not enough air, water, food, etc………
Funny BS. The biggest climate change “polluters”—Gates, Gore, Gavin, Greta, and Google, etc.— need to put their mouths where the imported fentanyl is and check out with a swallow to achieve net zero CO2, including congress critters like open borders Swallowell and NGOs like ex felon Sorros, the open conspiracy man for Heels Up and Hot Lips, Mr. Bill’s first bimbo eruption.
I have a Solution to Global Warming
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/i-have-a-solution-to-global-warming
hahahahaahahahaha like?
Instead of not having kids how about this?
This is the best global warming clip EVER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcx-nf3kH_M
Not to mention, expensive and annoying.
I like to ask the fools who believe this — WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO FIX THE PROBLEM?
Have you stopped using AC/Heating…
Not taking vacations?
Grow your own food?
Stop using your car?
They NEVER reply. They are doing NOTHING. They want ‘they’ do something… as in the government.
But what can the government do? If they reduce the burning of fossil fuels — we head into recession … massive job losses… that results in a deflationary death spiral and collapse.
The governments know all of this … they know Global Warming is bullshit… so why do they dump EVs and solar panels into the world?
Cuz https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/the-three-pillars-of-bullshit
Humbly, having been raised with the beauty of western Lake Superior, I have a love of nature.
#1: do whatever we can to protect what the US has wrt nature and pollution
#2: aggressively go after corporations that pollute and destroy #1
#3: move towards nuclear. A single Nimitz class carrier has a reactor that could serve some 700,000 homes, and takes up a semi or two in space
#4: electric efficiency should be a priority and electrify where it make most sense
#5: we are running out out of hydrocarbons, let’s plan for it
As far as global climate “emergency” there is scientifically, financially and mathematically NO WAY for the US to stop things, so scrap all those WEF goals and concentrate on how to deal with it within the US.
These are all good questions. But they are questions about values since you (hypothetically) assumed that the facts and causal models are settled. My way of thinking about value disagreements about climate change policies my thinking would be a little bit different and more abstract. First, I would first ask who has standing on the issue of climate change? For example: Just us? Future generations? Second, what are the criteria we should use to judge climate policies? Market impacts? Fairness? Political feasibility? And third, what are the weights we give to different considerations? Poor vs rich. Present vs future. Errors of commission vs omission. At the end, one may well end up with your set of specific questions, but I can see other normative questions as well.
Apart from immigration the population of the west is already well below replacement.
Promoting nuclear is a good idea for many reasons.
Hybrids was already happening. Just look at the success of the Toyota Pius before any mandates and it isn’t much of a car. A Corolla with the same body treatment and low friction tires would be about as good.
The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is currently uncomfortably low and too close to extinction of all living things. Plants remove it and some of it is sequestered on the bottoms of the deep oceans as carbonates. We are doing good work by burning fossil fuels.
Be careful listening to scientists’ proclamations. Most could make good livings as used car salespeople and are ever ready to prostitute themselves to whoever will give them funding. In this case a professed belief in the “climate crisis” gets the funding. Tells you all you need to know.
Hi Mish. Thank you for your post. I will usually respond to your posts on global warming and climate change if I have the time. I hope you looked at my response to your previous post on this topic. I spent a lot of my valuable time on it.
You ask: Assuming climate change is real, and 100% manmade, what can we do about it?
I am going to tell you what I believe the answer is. And I am also going to tell you why it will never happen. And yes, I have seen Konstantine Kisin’s video many times. It is pretty good.
1. The first and most important thing to do to solve the problem is to is to promote the education and understanding of the problem, and the science behind it. Because humanity will never be able to fix the problem if too many of us deny the problem exists. Which is the situation today. Take a good look at the video you mentioned in your previous post. It’s a great example of a clever piece of misinformation that manages to convince folks with limited scientific knowledge that there is some doubt about climate change. Get a couple of paid shills, with some science credentials to say that the science is wrong, or not settled. Just like the tobacco industry did. Very smart. And effective. Silence 20,000 scientists and the truth with a handful of shills and some clever misinformation. This is the first reason why it is going to be so difficult to solve the problem. It is too easy to fool the gullible.
2. However, let’s assume that we can accomplish #1. Now everyone understands the science and the problem. Great. Now how do we fix the problem? Well, next we need every country, every institution, every business large and small, and every human on earth to work together to solve this truly global problem. It is going to take a lot of cooperation and coordination to make the necessary changes. This is a monumental task and we need 99+% buy in. The problem with this is that it is impossible to get this level of cooperation. Will Israel work together with Iran? Russia with Ukraine? The US with China? Etc. Will Muslims work with Jews? All the races; all the skin colors; all the religions? Will the poorest in the world work with the richest? Not in your lifetime. And without that level of cooperation, we will make very little progress. How about trade wars and tariffs? They already are preventing us from doing some of the easy things that we actually could do. Instead, we will keep bickering and fighting and pointing fingers at each other. You first. You do something and I will consider doing something too. Lol! This is the second reason why we will keep suffering long into the future.
3. But, for argument’s sake, lets imagine that we can miraculously get everyone to cooperate. Then what? Well, we could probably start to make some pretty good progress, if we can manage to devote most of our time, effort and resources to solving this problem. However, this is not the only problem that individuals, towns, cities, states and countries face. And it’s a very long-term problem that will take over a century to fix. What about the other, more immediate problems that we all face. Poverty, hunger, disease, etc. We need to put resources into those problems. We also need to put time and resources into solving more pressing and immediate problems like hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, fires and other extreme events. The more we put into immediate problems, the less we put into a long-term problem like climate change. And since climate change is going to get worse for the rest of this century, we are going to have even more extreme weather events to deal with, which will slow our response to climate change.
4. What’s next? Cost. In order to solve this problem, one of the most important things to do is to eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels and transition to an all-electric world. Renewable energy, EVs etc. The problem is that we have been trying to do that for over 3 decades now. We have spent many trillions of dollars on renewables, and we have managed to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels from 82% of all energy, to 81% of all energy consumed. And to add insult, our overall energy demand had gone UP 67% over those 30 years, so that we are actually consuming MORE fossil fuels every single year. Trillions spent, and we are still emitting MORE every year. We are running faster and faster every year, and falling further behind. Mish mentioned 130 trillion needed. I doubt it will be that cheap.
5. Time and frustration. As I mentioned in my previous response to Mish’s first post on this topic, for the first time in 600 million years, CO2 is leading and global warming is following. The level of CO2 that we have today is going to keep going up until we can finally reach net-zero, which means no net emissions added to the atmosphere. This will likely take a hundred years, under the best-case scenario outlined above. This extra CO2 has happened in such a short period of time, that global warming is trailing our emissions by several decades. Which means that higher global temperatures are baked in for many decades to come. So, we are going to be working hard to lower our emissions towards net zero for the next century, and as we are working hard, global warming and climate change will keep getting worse. It’s like telling someone to diet and workout as much as possible, but that they are going to keep gaining weight for the rest of their life anyway. Just not as quickly as if they did nothing at all. That’s a hard sell. Is it possible that we will be able to stick to the diet and exercise plan for a hundred years with very little to show for it? Not likely.
I hear the same sh*t from folks all the time. If you believe in global warming, why are you driving a car, flying, or running an air conditioner? You’re a hypocrite.
Nope. I am a realist. I understand that global warming and climate change are real. I also understand that I am one person out of 8 billion, and there is nothing I can do as an individual to have any significant effect on this problem. The very best I can do is to be a voice of truth and information to help with point #1 above.
Other than that, I can try to figure out how to profit from this problem. And as many here are aware, I am a big investor in the oil and gas sector, because I realize that we are going to keep using more oil and gas every year. Because we are not going to voluntarily reduce our economic growth, or our living standards to solve this problem.
Cheers!
You CAN do something.
Every small contribution helps, especially BY SETTING AN EXAMPLE THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO SACRIFICE AND LIVE ACCORDING TO YOUR CONVICTIONS.
That is the strongest change that you can make because the people in your life circle will think more seriously about what they are doing as well.
Start by strictly living your beliefs.
If you are not willing to do that, you are not serious about the issue.
No cop-outs:
Sell your non-EV vehicle.
Buy an EV.
Ride a bike everywhere that you can.
Quit using A/C.
Volunteer for Earth Day clean up activities.
Stop eating meat.
Do not travel by jet or internal combustion engine transport.
Do not buy petro-chemical based footwear or clothing.
Install solar on your home (if you own one).
If you are not willing to make those changes, then you are not serious about what you say that you believe.
Nope. Not willing to do all that. Waste of my time. Though I will do some of those things if it is in my best interest.
There are a lot of problems in the world.
Yes. I know that global warming and climate change are real. Yes, I also understand that there are wars and conflicts happening all over the world. And yes, cancer kills a lot of people every year.
But I am also aware that there is nothing I can do that will make a difference to solving these problems.
Hey Nez; are you aware that Russia and Ukraine are at war? Why don’t you do something about it?
The free market only exists in Disneyland. It is a lie, there has never been and there will never be a free market. Capitalism is an economic model not a religion. If you don’t have to pay to clean up the pollution that comes from whatever it is that you sell then pollution is a good thing because you can increase your profit by reducing the cost to have to clean up your own mess. Better yet if the tab goes to the government spreading the cost to the taxpayers. The accumulation of wealth is the problem because you can never have enough. The only way to solve man made climate change is to do away with money. You cannot find joy by getting things. The only way to have joy and happiness is by giving. The only way we survive as a species is to change human nature by accepting the difference between what we need and what we want. Food, water, shelter, clothing, medical care, we should be able to provide these things with minimal effort and maintain stability with our planet without having to trade for it. Wouldn’t it be better to get health care from someone who wants to heal people instead of someone trying to get rich? People wrongly think technology is the answer to man made climate change and that we can waste as much as we want and all live like kings but it is our behavior that is the problem. I try to do my part to not be so wasteful and consume more than I need but I fail miserably. I still do it for my own conscience. None of this will happen so we are doomed as a species due to our own greed, selfishness and jealousy and we will get what we deserve. I just hope we don’t destroy our atmosphere and every living breathing thing on this planet in the process turning our beautiful planet into a lifeless rock rotation around the sun. Have a great day.
“The free market only exists in Disneyland. It is a lie, there has never been and there will never be a free market”
So what?
Do we strive for the right answer or piss and moan about it?
There has never been a free society either. But there are gradations of freedom, in society and in the market, from hardly any such as North Korea to quite a lot. What do you make of what is available? Which would you rather have?
Great post. Big problem: climate cultists are unable to comprehend what’s been presented.
On the upside, Paul Krugman could probably be recruited to push for minting a $130 trillion coin.
I like the post & I respect the attempt to bridge the gap. Very little can & will be done without a galvanizing event that pulls us together as a country. And the problem with that is that we’ve become so multicultural which leads to political division that this condition subverts our ability to act in a cohesive manner for the good of the country.
America is in decline and China is on the rise. Unless China has some sort of cultural revolution down the road that overthrows the CCP, then we’re screwed.
Climate change is real, but the financial & political cost to bring both sides together while protecting freedoms & economic security will be too great.
Basically, we make too much money here in the US to be able to afford the massive switchover that solving climate will require. Labor costs are astronomical nowadays and are only going to get worse.
Which of the following is more likely?
A) Conservatives don’t care the world is going to end
B) Liberals see it as a money grab.
Until Humans realize there are too many of us and we use too much it will slowly but surely destroy the planet. Maybe not climate change but just the fact that we are destroying the planet at rate never seen before. Acres and Acres a day of nature disappearing, more concrete jungle and asphalt roads.
Humans also waste and use more resources than necessary and big corporations encorurage this and tell people to consume and spent. Mega Mansions, big ass gas guzzling pickup trucks, trips for the sake of trips. Few want to economize and use only what is needed. In the end everything is finite.
Unless Humans stop the consuming beyond our needs the day of reckoning will come.
The vax is helping with depopulation
There might not have been a Snowball Earth, but Dumpster Earth is guaranteed to happen.
GREAT REMINDER. VIDEO should hit home for many. And perhaps she’d light that babies, soon to be adults need to be raised , well. This next generation will solve world problems, and not complain. Complaining is a resultant to propaganda and a generation that hasn’t worked for much……
So how many of these climate alarmists have sold their house, sold their cars, sold their cell phones and live off the land without any source of electricity?
Until they do, I will not believe a word they say about this “existential” crises.
The issue is that everyone wants to blame someone else. Like those mean old industrialists who provide you with travel, hot showers, air conditioning, etc. And, like, what’s her name flying in the family’s private jet from a speech on Greeness to the family’s yacht—a sailing boat with big engines, Or the multitude of entertainment moguls who fly via their jet to some Green conference? After all, it is for our benefit, right?
In 1950, the world’s population was around 2.5 billion; today, it is closer to 9 billion. That is over 6 billion more little heat sources and all their gear now wandering the Earth among the animals for their dining tables.
Storms in North Carolina “dumped a torrent of rain, triggering massive flooding throughout the state’s mountainous region. More than 22 inches of precipitation fell in some places in a 24 hour period.”
This is not describing 2024, rather it is describing an event that took place in 1916( per Doomberg).
How many people are your plans willing to sacrifice?
Strategically implementingthe new paradigm of Monetary Gifting integrates the self interests of business and the consumer, would create the kind political coalition that would enable the mega projects necessary to confront climate change, end inflation forever and make stable, prosperous and continual economic free flowingness. And all you need to do if you’re a libertarian is realize that “free” market theoretics is a complete misnomer, that is, it has mistaken chaos for freedom when in the human universe there is only freedom amongst known and enforable barriers.
Change the monetary paradigm and all of the conundrums you mention resolve and necessary rational action becomes a no brainer. Existential facts trump every other consideration.
Either a /s post or Kamala joined the chat. Always hard to decipher…
….60 minutes knew what to do..
Neither the republicans nor the democrats have any idea of the policies of the new monetary paradigm…or I’d be rich from royalties on my book and from Patreon.
Economics and politics doesn’t have to be a shit show of conflict and theoretical delusions…when you apply the integrative concept behind every historical paradigm change. Mish’s post is about finding an integrative solution to all of that falderal…and I’m still trying to get him and everyone here.
The problem is that the general understanding of the science is based on 500 year old “science” that has been enforced by a scientific community that prohibits independent thought and ideas. What if we really are on a flat plane, and the sun is “right up there,” not 93 million miles away. We see sideways rays through clouds all the time. A sun 1000x larger than “earth” would also show as dead straight rays. Maybe yes, carbon in the atmosphere is making that thing up there burn much hotter, if it burns at all. But look at all of the methane escaping the frac wells that nobody seems to care about. I can tell you that the UVC problem that was created by the solar radiation management spraying is killing the insect, and that there are very few small songbirds left at all these days. You see crows and predator birds. I think we are in big trouble, and that the corrupted framework of “science” isn’t going to be available to figure it out.
We’re doing the population thing, anyway. Every rich country has a shrinking incumbent population – immigration is responsible for more than all population growth.
Rich countries that minimize immigration (Japan, S Korea, China) are all shrinking.
There’s an argument to be made that all rich economies are long term FUBAR because of declining populations – if immigration doesn’t keep our numbers up.
There should be carrot and sticks for lowering emissions. We can have stricter fuel standards, and ignore conservatives who think having smaller car engines is a harbinger of the end of the world. And so on. Affirmative steps like electric vehicles do have environmental costs, but actually being conservative (which most political conservatives ironically are anything but) doesn’t have any cost and often saves you money which is precisely why there’s so many lobbying for more more more. Single serve coffee pods, water bottles, packaging… it’s simply wasteful and dumb and the opposite of conservative to be as wasteful as we are as a society.
It’s clear this needs to be a global solution.
Also, can we stop debating as to whether we “caused” climate change? Who cares? The issue is can we do something to help the matter, not did we cause it. If lightning hits your house you’re gong to try to put it out even you didn’t cause it.
And for many things we can fix we don’t actually know all of the causal links in the chain. In medicine very often we just know if we give people this chemical, their symptoms improve. We may have theories, but often they will be proven false, like we’ll find out years later that no, SSRIs don’t work for depression because they fix low serotonin levels.
Just because we may never know the cause of climate change doesn’t mean we can’t fix it. If the cause turns out to be the earth tilted, lowering CO2 sufficiently will still help even though the cause of the rise is the earth titled. The fix doesn’t have to directly reverse the causal inputs. Headaches aren’t “caused” by a lack of Advil.
We know lowering CO2, methane and other greenhouse gases will lower temperatures. This is not disputable. We test for this easily in a lab by altering gas concentrations and noting changes in temperature.
Hey Mike, check out tony seba podcasts
oh yeah now they want that socialist money\
https://www.reddit.com/r/sarasota/comments/1fzyo1b/hurricane_aid/#lightbox
Not to mention, all too many conservatives (not most of the ones here of course) want to lie about what FEMA is spending, and on what.
https://www.verifythis.com/article/news/verify/extreme-weather-verify/fema-hurricane-helene-money-750-dollars-fact-check/536-a21cad25-00c2-4386-a3a4-c5bebf4e9327
There was research done at Princeton years ago that concluded that in the past, temperature rose as much as 800 years prior to the increase of CO2. There is no physical evidence that indicates that increasing levels of CO2 cause increases in temperature. It’s cyclical. It was warmer during the Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warm Period than it is today.
Which is why they stopped flying and driving during those periods. It was only after the Romans successfully enacted a ban on fracking and offshore oil exploration/drilling that they were able to get rid of the horrible warming that everyone was enjoying. Oh yes sorry they didn’t have any of that so why was it warmer then? Right, no one knows but they do know now that it is magic CO2 that drives climate. 100 percent of the scientists paid to say so agree. Now for some sarcasm go to JoNova’s blog in Australia. She writes with the sort of sarcastic tone this silliness deserves so is entertaining.
You fix the problem by shutting down the media and it’s covert funding from propagandist vested interests.
I’ve never understood those that foist expensive unproven climate goals on the world’s population to protect the unborn at the expense of those living today.
I seriously believe the environmentalists desire everybody live in poverty and squalor. Their ideal society seems to be something on the order of Khmer Rouge Cambodia circa 1978. They want deindustrialization, depopulation, deprivation, and destruction. In short, they hate people and want them to die by the billions.
Small correction: everybody but themselves
Why can’t they volunteer to be first?
Step one: Stop cutting all the trees down.
How to “fix” the problem is something only the billionaires (and a few eco-nuts) want to discuss. The now demolished Georgia Guidestones provided the answer:
At all times keep the human population no more than 500,000,000.
Okay. We stand at 8,000,000,000 now. By this estimate, we are 16 times over the ideal limits.
That means — according to our benefactors who gave us the Guidestones and their eco-nut followers — 15 out of 16 people on Earth HAVE TO GO.
There. Problem fixed.
…but who’s gonna get rid of everyone?
Vast numbers of gay and trans …
There are 2 atoms that can form 4 bond s- silicon and C. Polymers require 2 bonds to make a polymer. But to make polymers functional with characteristics needed for strength, flexibility, stability etc the base atom must form 3 bonds. However atoms that can form 3 bonds has not been successful. One needs an atom that can form 4 bonds. A non carbon polymer for plastics and composites hasn’t been developed. Climatel change gurus need to learn more about chemistry
OK FOLKS HERE IT IS THE FINAL APPROACH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yq-0uD42HM&t=4s