The best moment from the Doha Climate Farce and the funniest thing I've seen all day.
(h/t Just Right which led me to the video)
Lord Moncktons account of the moment of clarity cannot be missed. Russia is actually blaming the failure of the talks on Lord Monckton. Well done my Lord!
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Oh Crap!
I've made a critical error in my logic concerning the fiscal cliff. In good faith I assumed that Democrats wanted the economy to do better and did not want to go over the fiscal cliff. My mistake. I did not account for the possibility that raising taxes back to the Clinton era and major cuts to defense spending as well as blaming it all on Republicans could be exactly what the Democratic Party wants after all.
Seen in that light, going over the fiscal cliff might be inevitable. Democrats are so determined to achieve the above outcomes that they don't care if they go off the cliff too. The negotiations on the Democrat side might all be theatrics. Its more a fecal cliff than a fiscal one.
Could they really be aiming for lose - lose? More people become dependent on government welfare and the Republican party is destroyed. It’s the one outcome they have complete control over. They can choose to lose. Oh Crap!
There is a bright side though. Stable, secure, peaceful, productive, profitable, prosperous, Canada can scoop up every company that doesn't want to pay a higher corporate tax. Every business and person making over $250,000 American Pesos a year should move to the True North Strong and Free. The Fraser Institute says that Alberta is is more free than Texas by a hair. Our lead is now secure thanks to the November election. You can always go back if sanity returns to Washington, or maybe you can just stay.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Another Green Debate: “Oil: Dangerous Addiction or Healthy Choice.”
Alex Epstien goes up against Dr. Dino Ress this time and wins handily. Dr. Ress seems like a nice enough person who I'm sure believes that what he is teaching is for the greater good. Unfortunately the chemistry PhD doesn't quite grasp the economics of energy and it showed.
Dr. Ress clearly believes that oil is the root of all evil but fails to put forth a good argument why? He also claimed that there are four futures for oil but doesn't explain why there should be only four possible outcomes.
Alex Epstien made very clear linkages with our standard of living and the use of oil. The most astounding part of this refresher is that he has to give it at all. Children should understand the importance of mining to their lives by the 4th grade, but sadly it needs to be explained again to adults who have lost the faculty of reason in this area.
Mr. Epstien skillfully batted down misconceptions about fracking and nuclear accidents. He also does really well explaining that the real issue isn't about a desire for oil but a desire for energy market freedom. If oil is the overall best energy for transportation then so be it.
I may work in the oil industry but if someone were to invent a better fuel tomorrow it would be great. The UN or some NGO or even our own government can't just make a law stating that donkey power or whatever is better than oil because donkeys have some intrinsic goodness revealed only to members of a particular ideology.
Only the market can tell us what is the best fuel. While I might lose my job along with hundreds of thousands of others if something better than oil appeared, the net result would be an economic boom. Our standard of living would improve because a purely market driven energy transition would mean more capital available to just about everyone.
An ideologically driven transition of energy would have to be forced on markets. People would be made to use a less efficient and more expensive form of energy which would drag the economy down and reduce our standard of living. We have already started down this road by deficit subsidizing inefficient forms of energy like wind and solar.
Some people like the idea of sacrifice for high ideals and that's fine for them. When they try to force it on others for the sake of their own satisfaction, well, what about my satisfaction? What makes their ideal society so good that I must transfer my own hopes for happiness to them against my will? Who in the hell gives them this right over me? I didn't, and I pledge to you here and now that I will never support or comply with the green agenda.
Dr. Ress clearly believes that oil is the root of all evil but fails to put forth a good argument why? He also claimed that there are four futures for oil but doesn't explain why there should be only four possible outcomes.
Alex Epstien made very clear linkages with our standard of living and the use of oil. The most astounding part of this refresher is that he has to give it at all. Children should understand the importance of mining to their lives by the 4th grade, but sadly it needs to be explained again to adults who have lost the faculty of reason in this area.
Mr. Epstien skillfully batted down misconceptions about fracking and nuclear accidents. He also does really well explaining that the real issue isn't about a desire for oil but a desire for energy market freedom. If oil is the overall best energy for transportation then so be it.
I may work in the oil industry but if someone were to invent a better fuel tomorrow it would be great. The UN or some NGO or even our own government can't just make a law stating that donkey power or whatever is better than oil because donkeys have some intrinsic goodness revealed only to members of a particular ideology.
Only the market can tell us what is the best fuel. While I might lose my job along with hundreds of thousands of others if something better than oil appeared, the net result would be an economic boom. Our standard of living would improve because a purely market driven energy transition would mean more capital available to just about everyone.
An ideologically driven transition of energy would have to be forced on markets. People would be made to use a less efficient and more expensive form of energy which would drag the economy down and reduce our standard of living. We have already started down this road by deficit subsidizing inefficient forms of energy like wind and solar.
Some people like the idea of sacrifice for high ideals and that's fine for them. When they try to force it on others for the sake of their own satisfaction, well, what about my satisfaction? What makes their ideal society so good that I must transfer my own hopes for happiness to them against my will? Who in the hell gives them this right over me? I didn't, and I pledge to you here and now that I will never support or comply with the green agenda.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Agenda 21 and Anthem
Glenn Beck and Harriet Parke have written an excellent book called Agenda 21. Its about a dystopian future where UN Agenda 21 has taken over every aspect of life in the name of saving the planet.
I'm loving it so far. It reminds me a lot of Ayn Rand's Anthem.
Anthem was written in 1937 after Ayn Rand escaped from communist Russia. Anthem is short enough to read in one or two sittings and available entirely free at the above link.
Agenda 21 could easily be described as the prequel to Anthem since the characters in Agenda 21 still remember how it used to be in our civilization. The character's in Anthem are generations removed from all history and science and as ignorant and primitive as Iron Age slaves.
Both are pertinent timely reads in a world going nuts.
I'm loving it so far. It reminds me a lot of Ayn Rand's Anthem.
Anthem was written in 1937 after Ayn Rand escaped from communist Russia. Anthem is short enough to read in one or two sittings and available entirely free at the above link.
Agenda 21 could easily be described as the prequel to Anthem since the characters in Agenda 21 still remember how it used to be in our civilization. The character's in Anthem are generations removed from all history and science and as ignorant and primitive as Iron Age slaves.
Both are pertinent timely reads in a world going nuts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)