Posted on 11/18/2010 8:45:15 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
IPCC Official: Climate Policy Is Redistributing The Worlds Wealth
105 Responses to IPCC Official: Climate Policy Is Redistributing The Worlds Wealth
Because of ill-conceived environmental regulations perhaps?
*************************************EXCERPT***************************************
kramer says:
Ive been saying this for years. These greens want to use AGW to redistribute wealth, both within and between nations, they want us to transfer our technology and tech know-how to the world, they are using AGW to help start a global government that will manage the worlds resources, and they expect our standard of living to be significantly lowered in order so that theres more oil and other natural resources for the rest of the world to use.
AGW probably really means (in the inner green circles)
********************************EXCERPT**********************************************
galileonardo says:
Betsy says: I think you all are missing something here. The AGW folks want to keep Africa as poor as possible, other than various oligarchies, so that Africa wont emit any evil CO2′.
Bingo, despite some of the protests I see. I was reading through the comments waiting for someone to point out what is the real goal of the global governance/redistribution agenda. The agenda isnt about helping the poor. It is about the effort to make sure there is not another United States. I wrote about this at length a while back on The Air Vent (thanks Jeff):
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/uns-ideal-global-government/#more-10157
A few comments here have touched upon the real agenda, but I am surprised at how many of the posters here are surprised. Im sorry to echo crosspatchs comment right out of the gate, but DUH! None of this was conspiracy theory or far-fetched in any way and the UNs Emissions Scenarios was written a decade ago. As I point out in my article, this information is all out there in their own words! This might have been a hint:
Massive income redistribution and presumably high taxation levels may adversely affect the economic efficiency and functioning of world markets.
Whodathunkit. Using their own figures, the dent in global GDP by 2100 following their Sustainable Development B1 Scenario will be $200 trillion annually! The annual per capita income among the poor will be $35,000 instead of $70,000. Those are their numbers folks.
So, as Betsy points out, this is about controlling the worlds resources, stifling development in Annex 2 countries, and de-developing, as John Holdren calls it, the U.S. and other Annex 1 countries. As I note in the article, the only things sustained under SD B1 are misery and poverty, and that prolonging of poverty will be a death sentence for millions. As others have pointed out, the climate agreements transparently reflect this agenda. The only conspiracy involved was the conspiracy of not admitting to the real global governance agenda despite the readily-available evidence to the contrary.
I cannot tell you how many times I was called a conspiracy theorist, involved in black helicopter talk, wearing a tin-foil hat, etc. when bringing this up. Always the response was the same old nothing to see here with a crackpot thrown in for good measure. Well Ill be sure to share Edenhofers admissions with the next AGW zealot who tries to claim that the IPCC is all about the science. The claim is right but they have the wrong scientific field in mind. These puppets are activist scientists engaged in wholly political science. Thanks for yet another exoneration AGW cultists, not that any skeptic needed it.
And the thing that angers me to no end is Edenhofers admission that this is not about the real environmental issues facing the planet. As an environmentalist myself, this diversion of resources, attention, and, last but not least, scientific credibility, has been one of my primary bones with these AGW control freaks all along. This movement has set back real climate science and true environmentalism for who knows how long.
While Hansen, Mann et al were pre-occupied with their misguided AGW advocacy, the last white rhino in Krugersdorp was killed, ridiculously huge areas of habitat was destroyed to make way for ends-justify-the-means biofuels and solar arrays, and many other environmental/humanitarian issues that could have been directly affected with proven results were put on the back burner to focus on the CO2 phantom menace. By-and-large the real environmental degradation taking place worldwide remains largely unaddressed. It is a travesty. Thanks for nothing. Since many of you are surprised and most might miss this in the article I reference above, here are some of the terms/phrases from the Copenhagen negotiating text I gathered that you should familiarize yourself with:
Historical climate debt; transparent system of governance; compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity; environmental justice; green fund; levies on CO2 emissions; taxes on carbon-intensive products and services; levies on international and maritime transport; levies on international transactions; penalties or fines for non-compliance; ODA additional to ODA targets; adaptation debt; 2 per cent of gross national product; and uniform global levy.
Open up your wallets folks. Oh, I almost forgot. As Doug says, this wont go down without a fight. Id say its high time to put up your dukes if you havent already. I hate to keep quoting myself, but the fastest way to true environmental stewardship is wealth. Get out of the worlds way or, quite simply, youll be pushed out of the way. I sure intend on fighting this fight until this people-punishing agenda in dead and buried. Ding. Ding. Cheers!
US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal NOAA Disgraced (450 / 600 F Temp Readings!?)
Started a thread with postings from "the Air Vent":
UNs Ideal Global Government ( with funding via carbon credits )
Everyone should have a couple copies of this book to pass along to friends.
“First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the worlds wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.”
I wonder what his Freeper name is!?
I’m not sure whether to thank the little bastard or say FUOE. (Excuse my french - but this REALLY makes me angry).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.