"Lets take this one at a time. I know that there are many liberals who see the world through a prism that allows them to feel good about destroying lives to maintain power. Take for example the welfare system, it isn't about doing right, it is about keeping a permanent underclass who will vote for more free lunches."
I would say most folks play the hand they are giving. As much as we like to think that welfare is destructive, it is just as supportive. In thinking of welfare, we should not neglect the fact that middle and upper income folks are recipients of subsidies (mortgage deductions, property tax deductions, child support deductions, business expenses, charitable donations).
Anyone who works in a particular industry, has a bias to keep their jobs and to perpetuate "their game". Think Wall Street as much as the food stamp administration, welfare, Social Security, Wall Street sales people, sub-prime mortgage loan writers etc.
There are even many liberals who are oblivious to the consequences of the policies they support. Take for instance the effort to destroy the medical system in America.
Are liberals out to destroy the medical profession? I did not think so. What the liberals wish to do is extend medical care to those who cannot afford it. At one time, there was no public educational system in this country. Do you suppose out nation has benefited by providing it to all? Most property taxes go towards this. Should water delivery remained in private hands? How about Police and Fire Departments? Electricity distribution (TVA, Rural Electrification Administration, BPA).
Global warmongers may be nice people who mean well. Clearly those leading the charge are either in it for the money, such as Al Gore or for power, that would be the back door socialists.
I would disagree. I believe that many of those who profess to be concerned about the environment are genuine. They are thinking (as I am) that with the rest of the people on the face of the earth developing a better lifestyle for themselves, the demands on our resources is going to be acute. Some may wish those developing countries not to do what we here in North America have done to get us to the point where we are a developed nation. That would be hypocitical.
If we can assume that earth's resources are going to be limiting, and perhaps destructive to all of us surviving on this planet, changes will have to be made.
I think the biggest sticking point is that the scope of defining the problem (global warming, climate change etc), is so large and our scientific models may not be very scientific, site specific, and short in geological time, that the issue has entered the realm of religious discussion, where there is not undisputed proof of a G-d etc. (who argues that the sun is not going to come over the Eastern horizon tomorrow morning?)
There are many global warmongers who choose to remain oblivious to scientific facts. That was the genius of the strategy, get a small lead and then declare it game over at halftime. Some may even still believe despite the mounting evidence of the fraud.
I am of the opinion that we should err on the side of safety and being prepared for the future. Even if the global warming/climate change is an aberration or a fleeting phase (if it is an issue at all), we should be developing more efficient technologies that are an improvement for doing more with less or just doing less altogether. In some ways, I see those who are opposed to the global warming issue as those who are afraid to get out of their comfort zone and have a built-in inertia (and perhaps to unethically profit by it). Think GM buying up bus systems.
At the same time, I see global warming folks as trying to fudge data to justify their cause (and perhaps to unethically profit by it).
In short, we need to go down this road of preparing for the future and building future insurance now. We have the technological skills to do it (with a generous dose of "foreign" engineers and techologists)to make it happen. Scare tactics and fear work an does altruism. Global warming may be a sprinkle of both.
Most is commentary and noise.
len
Happy Thanksgiving |
