Friday, July 14, 2017

Gizmodo tells us how to have a personal impact on climate change!

“The science tells us basically the future of a good life on planet Earth depends on reducing climate pollution by about 90 percent by 2050,” sustainability professor and study co-author Kimberly Nicholas told Gizmodo. “A lot of people recognize this and are ready to act, but most don’t know what to do.”

Let's look at their 'high impact personal choices" list:

1. Have one less child. This is especially a good choice in Germany, France, and England. You can reduce your impact and that of all your descendants, and no one else will move in and have lots of kids, right? Better yet, have no children at all. The ultimate virtue signal. Paul Ehrlich's predictions have been proven correct time after time! 

2. Live car free.  This is very politically correct, and makes you much easier to propagandize, herd and control. NYC residents know that the subways are so good that nobody needs a car. Any right thinking Californian knows that riding BART trains is much safer than driving your own car. You should also support huge bond issues to build more subways and light rail with union workers. Those self driving cars that use existing roads more efficiently are 100 years away, right? And rising real estate prices and rents benefit everyone equally, right?

3. Avoid one transatlantic flight.  This shows tremendous Euro-centric and racial bias. It should read "transcontinental" or "transoceanic". But, this is another great virtue signaling opportunity. It's best to just stay home and never travel anywhere. The green jet set crowd is an exception, since they travel in service to others, of course. Do what they say, not what they do.

4. Buy green energy.  This reduces demand for conventional energy sources and keeps prices down for others, so that allows them to use more energy, so that's good, right?  Solar panels on the home make perfect sense, especially in places where conventional electricity is expensive, like Europe and Hawaii, and all that nasty manufacturing is outside the US, which is a benefit, right? But using solar for transportation and industrial uses that require high energy density and dispatch-ability is not practical until someone invents a good storage system. 

5. Switch to an electric car. This one is a great virtue signal, but since the vast majority of electricity is generated by coal and natural gas, you are really not doing much. But those exotic metals and catalysts in the batteries will force someone to come up with a way to dispose of all that toxic waste 20 years out. So that's progress, right? Plus, 700+ new coal plants being built in China (as part of the Climate Agreement) might someday be able to sell you electricity to charge your battery, which will also improve China's balance of payments.

6. Eat a plant based diet.  This requires a bit of study to avoid protein deficiency and the resulting health problems, including confusion and difficulty in processing new information.  Thanks to 1. above, if you don't have any children, then they don't need any protein to thrive and develop, and the world is better off, right?   Plus the mental issues will make you a more politically correct citizen.  

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Private Home Ownership May Not Be Viable Because Climate

Western Sydney University Researcher Louise Crabtree, writing for The Conversation, thinks in a world torn by climate disasters ownership of private property may have to be sacrificed, to be replaced by a system of housing cooperatives or a roaming right to reside.....

I propose that California should lead the way, by opening all beach-side property with a new ownership and sharing model that creates just access to water. All previously private beaches should become open camps, with indigenous peoples and refuges given first priority. The first beachhead should be Malibu, using eminent domain and marshal law as required. Water to the people!

Ground Zero is pictured below:

Image result for barbra streisand malibu

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Dems to Move Convention?

Democrats should move their convention. The people of North Carolina need to be shown what people everywhere need to learn: If you don't vote the way we tell you, your vote doesn't count!

You are only useful at election time, and it you don't vote for the machine, then you don't matter. Of course, if you do vote for the machine, then you don't matter either.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

What Is A New Barbarian?

The North Carolina election results have some Hollywood liberals upset. They define Barbarians as anyone who is unenlightened enough to disagree with them.  And they may impose the ultimate sanction within their power - deny them invitations to 'all the right parties'.

Barbarians tend to be pragmatic and realistic, not insulated and iconoclastic.  They reexamine things daily, and don't mind testing some of those liberal truths that don't hold up.

When the Romans said Rome was invincible, Barbarians checked out their capabilities and decided it was not true, and that what was best for the Barbarians was to challenge the Romans. That is what is happened to Democrats in 2010, and it is happening again in 2012.

The people who voted in North Carolina think society is better off with male female households and real limited federal powers. The people in other states do too.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Supreme Surprise?

Liberals seem to be shocked that the Supreme Court justices are unabashedly taking potshots at Obama-care and taking delight in showing the administration and especially the Solicitor General how embarrassing and difficult it is to defend the indefensible!

Supreme court justices may lack the incredible narcissistic egos of liberal politicians, but they do have egos, and after the disrespectful comments from the administration after the Citizens United decision, they should have known somebody was going to get publicly bitch slapped at oral arguments.   McCain Feingold also sought to radically alter the relationship between the government and the governed, in complete defiance of the Constitution, because it was 'reasonably necessary'!

I got the impression, however, that some of the justices still think that if the legislation is 'reasonably necessary' then it should be enacted even if it is completely at odds with the Constitution.  This may be the safe harbor that the three liberals who have already decided (and perhaps brokered) their vote will seek to shelter them.

What if a law was Constitutionally sound but so expensive that it clearly would not work in practice. Would the Court simply rule on legal arguments and wash its hands of implementation issues? Or would it tie itself in knots to find a way to declare it was not constitutional?

When the converse is true, and a law is clearly at odds with the Constitution, but may solve some economic issue, is it okay to tie those knots to try to find a way declare it Constitutionally sound?

What to do with Zimmerman?

I note that prominent Democrats are calling for restraint and justice in the Trayvon Martin case, and all of them are united in their desire to make sure that no one is deprived of their civil liberties!

One of the most respected Democrats has called for Zimmerman to be arrested and detained for his own safety:

Another, no lesser light, Maxine Waters, perhaps the intellectual giant of the party, has assured us that this is a hate crime:

I know President Obama takes his oath and duty as the nation's top law enforcement officer seriously, and he is monitoring this case closely, even while busy planning arms control concessions.   If he thought the Black Panther Party bounty on Zimmerman was out of line, he would have said so!

Since this president has been given unprecedented power to arrest and detain US citizens indefinitely and without a hearing, he should immediately arrest and detain Zimmerman, at least until November!

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Soccer Disgrace

When I first heard about the US getting completely snookered, and not even getting an invite to the soccer competition for the upcoming Olympics, I was at a loss as to how we could solve this problem. But the disgrace of being shut out from a competition that most European countries qualified for is almost unbearable. I thought the smart folks were telling us that the USA needs to be more like the European Social(ist) Democracies, not less!

Perhaps we should turn to outcome based solutions, meaning that we simply declare that all countries should get to participate in the tournament. After all, that's only fair!

Perhaps we should take affirmative action! Demand lower standards for countries with less soccer tradition and opportunity!

But if the Supreme Court rules that Obama Care is constitutional, the problem can be easily solved! We will simply mandate that all schools must hire more soccer coaches and all students must enroll in soccer programs year round!  Soon we will join the world community and hold our heads up high.