![](../imagenes_titulos3/sociopol_greatreset272.gif)
by
I&I Editorial Board
January 11, 2024
from
IssuesInSights Website
![](../imagenes_sociopol5/greatreset272_01_small.jpg)
A year ago while
in Davos, Switzerland, for the
World Economic Forum (WEF),
the administration's climate functionary
John Kerry
said that,
"money, money, money, money, money, money,
money" was needed for climate programs... (video
HERE)
That string of words actually corresponds with a
sum, and it's $150 trillion...!
Go ahead, try to comprehend that number.
It's about 51/2 times the size of the U.S.
economy, more than four times larger than the (always-growing)
federal debt, and
150% of the world's GDP.
Or, according to Eric Worrall at the
Watts Up With That?
climate site,
"if you spent $130 million every day since
the death of Jesus Christ, just about now you would be
approaching $100 trillion."
That it will be spent over the
next 26 years doesn't mean that
it's not a significant, and economy-breaking, amount.
The immense size of the "need" matters little to the Davos crony
crowd, which will meet for the 54th time next week.
The gathering of the rich and powerful will spend its week
schmoozing, trading favors and backslapping to become richer and
more powerful.
And of course talking about how much the world
needs them and their special skills to solve the climate crisis they
have fabricated, and how much of other people's money they need to
get the job done.
But let's say the climate cabal gets the $150 trillion (after all,
it's only about $5 trillion a year) from taxpayers.
What can we expect in return?
Economic struggles.
Energy shortages.
And zero impact on the climate.
"You can turn out the lights and shut
down the cars and oil fields and you won't affect the
weather, because, if you believe humans are causing
'dangerous' climate change, which I don't, developing
countries, led by China and India, are presently driving the
bus," says H. Sterling Burnett, director of the
Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental
Policy.
"In the end, the only true effect (President Joe)
Biden's climate efforts will have on Americans is to
make their supply of electric power more expensive and less
reliable, to make travel more difficult and expensive, and
cost jobs and lives."
Research by University of Sussex economist
Richard S.J. Tol, whose other academic and institutional
affiliations are too numerous to list here, found that reaching
previously agreed upon climate targets can't withstand a
cost-benefit analysis.
"In 2050, the year of net-zero, the best
estimate of the benefits of the 1.5ºC target are about 0.5% of
GDP while
the costs are almost 5%," he
wrote last year.
He further noted that,
"the biggest policy challenge lies in dealing
with the inevitable fall-out when the 1.5ºC target is missed,
perhaps later this decade, and the 2.0ºC becomes undeniably
infeasible.
The environmental movement will have to come
to terms with a catastrophe that was foretold but did not
materialize."
While we'd be pleased to see
the climate alarmists come to terms
with,
its many missed predictions, exaggerations,
irresponsible fearmongering, obstructive "protests," constant
streams of nonsense and demands for money,
...we fear that it will take another
generation for rationality to prevail...
True believers don't easily surrender their
convictions.
Grifters greedily cling to their racket.
Politicians don't amass power just to give it
up when it's shown the facts aren't on their side.
The reasonable among us still have a lot of work
to do...
|