l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Professor Calls For A Depression To Fight Global Warming
BY KERRY JACKSON
05:33 PM ET
Are those who continually hector us about saving our world from global
warming truly interested in the planet, or is there some other motive at
work? Quite clearly, it's the latter.
Sometimes the warming warriors will let their real reasons slip. Christiana
Figueres, executive secretary of United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, has admitted that the aim of climate activists is not to
save us from environmental doom but to crush capitalism. Author Naomi Klein
has made a similar acknowledgment. These neatly fit the Kinsley definition
of a political gaffe: A politician or public figure who wants to influence
policy reveals a truth that he or she did not intend to admit.
Don't think these people aren't serious. They are. And they are willing to
throw advanced economies into recession to get their way. Earlier this month
climate professor Alice Bows-Larkin said that in order to win the warming
war, developed nations need to sharply cut their output while the Third
World needs to increase its output.
This is "so everyone gets a 'fair' share of a smaller pie," explains Eric
Worrall on the Watts Up With That blog.
The Bows-Larkin plan for reaching this equilibrium in a world with a smaller
economic pie is breathtaking, even for the alarmist community.
"If you're in a country where per capita emissions are really high — so
North America, Europe, Australia — emissions reductions of the order of 10%
per year, and starting immediately, will be required for a good chance of
avoiding the two-degree target," she said.
Ten percent? What does this mean in terms of economic health in developed
nations? It means economic disaster. Bows-Larkin herself points to the work
of economist Nicholas Stern, who "said that emission reductions of more than
1% per year had only ever been associated with economic recession or
upheaval." But somehow she misses the depths to which her plan will take us.
If we read all this correctly, in order to reach the 10% reduction in
emissions output, we have to plunge our economies into a recession 10 times
worse than any we've ever experienced before. We hope Bows-Larkin doesn't
expect developed nations to eagerly support this idea.
Bows-Larkin believes her plan is merely a temporary "period of planned
austerity in wealthy nations." Those are nice words. But her regime will
lead to hardship that advanced nations haven't known since before they were,
well, advanced. It will also make matters worse in developing countries
because they can't grow unless the First World grows.
It's been said many times that doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. But we think we
've found a much more accurate example of insanity at work. The Bows-Larkin
plan is utterly mad. |
|
