Democrat candidates for president talk about climate change as an existential threat that is not being addressed. Their solutions range from rejoining the Paris Agreement to the Green New deal.
This is a collection of clever devils who claim that republicans, the fossil fuel industry, and skeptics deny that climate change is real and oppose any actions to solve the problem. They paint a picture of an impending apocalypse that requires their leadership to avoid disaster.
Their rhetoric is nothing more than a Mugs Game, Mug was a 19thslang word for a fool, in particular someone who had been duped. In the early 20th century, Mugs Game was applied to a wide range of activities that would result in a loss no matter how much it looks like a winning opportunity.
If climate advocates and their complicit media were honest, they would admit that the basis for their certitude is far less than certain and that no matter what we do, the effects will not have a great effect because the rest of the world will not commit economic suicide. EU economic growth has been declining in large measure because of programs like Germany’s ENERGIEWENDEwhich has led to electricity prices almost three times the US average.
A review by the Climate Action Network concluded that “While all European Union countries signed up to the Paris Agreement, most are failing to work towards delivering on its objectives,”– cutting greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels. Sweden is doing the best in achieving the 2020 interim target but most of the others will fall short in spite of efforts to exploit loopholes. The EU actions, ineffective as they have been, demonstrate the inherent conflict between attempting to be dark green and economic growth.
Slowing economic growth makes citizens restless, so additional and more serious EU climate change action will likely take a back seat to economic concerns.
If the democrat candidates and the complicit media told the truth, it would become clear that the 40% reduction below 1990 emissions that the UN claims is needed to avoid catastrophe by 2030 is foolish, with or without US participation. Last year, global emissions were 37 billion tons. In 1990, they were 22 billion. The 40% reduction would take them to 14 billion, the level of 1970.
The current crop of candidates offering elaborate climate actions know all of these facts, including that serious action to meet the Paris Agreement objective would cause a global depression. They are not trying to save the planet; they are trying to save their jobs. They are political entrepreneurs who are using the climate change as another way to shift more political power in Washington. But if one them is successful next November, he or she won’t be able to completely abandon today’s rhetoric, so economic growth will once again will be imperiled.