Posted by
Catmman on Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:58:58 PM
Climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It’s now an issue of race, according to global warming activists and policy makers.
Notice how there is no mention of SCIENTIST? Just "activist" and "policy makers". This should tell you already where this article is headed. And that's just the FIRST sentence!
“It is critical our community be an integral and active part of the debate because African-Americans are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change economically, socially and through our health and well-being,” House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., said July 29.
So if your white and it's rainy, gloomy and cold outside this coming winter; when you get a touch of the Winter "blahs" just remember - black people will feel worse than you. Just because their black. Rep. Clyburn says so.
“Though far less responsible for climate change, African-Americans are significantly more vulnerable to its effects than non-Hispanic whites,” the report says. “Health, housing, economic well-being, culture, and social stability are harmed from such manifestations of climate change as storms, floods, and climate variability.
Got that? Blacks are "far less responsible" for climate change as well. It's all of us evil white folk apparently who are poluting the planet making the world unsafe for non-whites.
“[W]hile individual storms cannot be linked specifically to climate change, scientists warn that warmer waters may foster-more intense storms,” the background paper on the commission’s efforts, authored by Michel Gelobter, Carla Peterman and Azebuilke Akaba said. “The flooding of New Orleans still highlights the vulnerability of the African-American community to types of extreme weather events expected with global climate change.”
Katrina? All about black people. I suppose they are making the argument here that only blacks suffered from the effects of Katrina, and by virtue of their skin color are targeted by flood waters specifically because they are black. I could point to the fact that south Texas was just hit by a Category II hurricane just last week, but the hispanics and whites (and blacks) here in Texas must have evolved some type of genetic defense against hurricane floodwaters. I haven't seen to many Texans (of any color) holding out their hands for a guvment debit card. I also enjoy how "
individual storms cannot be linked specifically to climate change" but these morons then go on to specifically tie Katrina to global climate change.
NOW let's slam those who have money. Those who may want to invest their own money in "climate change solutions" shouldn't be allowed to earn any profit from their investment!
J. Andrew Hoerner, director of the sustainable economics program at Redefining Progress and a co-author of the EJCC report, told the Business & Media Institute that solutions to climate change should be designed in a way so investors don’t reap all the benefits.
“There is a certain disconnect between what is good for workers, consumers, managers, and the economy on one hand and stockholders on the other,” Hoerner said. “We found that the combination of efficient market instruments, return of the revenue, cost-effective promotion of new clean technologies and efficiency, and targeted policies for low-income households grows the economy. It increases employment and profits overall, and provides a net benefit for consumers.”
Workers of the World UNITE!! “We found that the combination of efficient market instruments, return of the revenue, cost-effective promotion of new clean technologies and efficiency, and targeted policies for low-income households grows the economy." WTF is a efficient market instrument? That whole sentence reads like a Dilbert cartoon! How does anything in that sentence equal the outcome, ie growing the economy? And I thought profits were bad? If the investors aren't going to be allowed a return on their investment (profit), why bring it up?
The report suggested implementing a “fee, tax or allowance auction on polluters,” which was meant to “eliminate the financial burden on low-income and moderate-income households.This would pay for efforts to reduce global warming. Hoerner said that although it would cause product costs to increase, under his policy, the revenue from the “fee, tax, or allowance auction payment” would be redistributed to consumers to offset the higher costs.
It's always about the money. Let's just implement a new "fee". We'll give the money to those who need it - the ones who aren't responsible for global warming. Wait, what? We should give the "extra money" generated from a tax on global warming to those who don't cause global warming so they can offset the cost of the global warming they don't cause? If blacks don't cause global warming, why do they need money to offset it's effects? Shouldn't that money go to those who cause global warming (read whitey) so they can clean up their act - thereby eliminating global warming's impact on everyone? Or do these folks not care how global warming effects anyone other than blacks? How does that NOT make these people racists?
This is the most patently racist, anti-capitalist, Socialist, offensive post I think I have ever read on global warming/climate change. I am disgusted that a member of the United States House of Representatives, a sitting legislator, was even part of this travesty let alone a major player in its production.
This is probably the best evidence that global warming/climate change has nothing whatsoever to do with the planet or environment. It is about government control. It's about class warfare. It's about money; the redistribution of income.