Replies

This is an excellent answer to your question, which Michael responded to earlier:

"What on earth do these doomsday "global warming" fanatics expect to gain? What is in it for the NYT and the rest of these losers?"

Michael's excellent response: The Environmental movement is the New Left in this country. It has become obvious to these communists and left-socialists that the American people are never going to voluntarily choose Communism, so their only hope is to gain control subversively - using, as their pretext phony environmental science. In this way, they can erode your freedoms, appropriate or make otherwise useless your private property, restrict your choice of purchases to only those goods deemed OK by Central Planning, control energy policy, expand taxation to confiscatory levels to "fund environmental goals and programs" (which includes welfare and other income redistribution schemes), and to gain power and control over the means of production of the US economy under the guise of protecting the environment.

I would add that the NY Slimes has been in bed with the Opecker Princes since the days of the first phoney oil crisis. I'm sure that the Opecker Princes have bought a lot of advertising in payment for the increased dependency on Opecker Oil thanks to the Slimes, the enviral whackos and Senators like Da$$hole who need the Slimes and envirals to be elected.

Kudos to Michael for his excellent response to your question and Scruffdog's ? re what does the NY Slimes get out of these lies and why do they lie!

Now Ernest, please pick up your text book and turn to page 18.

Given that the ability to gain personal control of commons is based upon the ability to make a political sale, there are several prerequisites:
* A simple justification to maximize the applicability of the claim to individual perceptions and desires.
* A majority perception that acquisition comes at minimal personal cost.
* Collective benefits that are difficult to measure or long deferred.
* Powerful beneficiaries with sufficient personal interest and resources to fund and execute the taking.
* Control of communications media to influence majority opinion then becomes the cheapest means to control factors of production and the key to controlling wealth.
Does the need to maintain a sense of crisis lead to shortsighted decisions? Does it lead to the unconscious realization of self-fulfilling prophecies? Does it create a smokescreen for the exercise of corrupt intent? Does it overtax the ability to generate capital? If we adopt an ill-conceived plan, could such an exercise irreversibly damage the resource? Could the repeated application of mechanics like this lead to the unwitting vengeance of self-destruction?
There are those who have come to regard the exercise of external claims upon private property as a structural evil, a distorted exercise in "ends" justification for personal gratification disguised as altruism. It is truly curious that the same people, who warn us that the cause of ecological problems is a lack of individual motivation to care for commons, propose solutions that are in structural antipathy to maximizing the value of the assets. The very act of collectivizing the factors of production has historically destroyed their value. That loss can propagate rapidly. People get desperate because the process of political acquisition of private property is unsustainable.