I think we may have reached the point where we need to do something serious about climate change.
Obviously I don’t mean do anything more here in the UK – the tax we levy just on petrol products is already a higher burden than the $80 per carbon tonne recommended by the Stern Review.
We are already doing more than our bit.
Indeed even if we went further, back to the pre-Internet Age even, and halved our energy consumption, the UK only contributes about 2% of global emissions, so we’d only be reducing from 2% to 1% – a reduction of 1% globally.
That’s too trivial a change to make any real difference (to borrow a phrase used by wealthy Lefties when asked to voluntarily pay more tax)
We need to find a way to encourage our friends abroad to do more – they are the ones burning coal and wood to keep warm. Banning wood-burning stoves here in the UK is all very well, but preventing the cold huddled masses in the third world from burning whole forests in order to boil water and prevent their children from dying from dysentery? Surely THAT’S what we should be doing?
And I know just the way to do it.
Let’s ban immigration from countries where they don’t spend 2% of their GDP on fighting climate change.
After all, what choice do we have?
If they don’t stop burning these dirty fuels to stay alive, the temperature of the planet might rise by two degrees and all the wealthy people who live near the beach will suddenly find their flood insurance rising in price, or worse – their property prices falling!
And yes I know that a couple of degrees might suddenly make Siberia a place where we can grow food, but it will make the Sahara even more inhospitable dammit!
We MUST encourage those doing the most damage to our climate to stop immediately – it’s for the children,
Just not their children.
Alex, don’t tell me you believe in the scam. Don’t tell me that you think, like Tim, that pandering to the perpetrators of the scam is a sensible tactic. A scam needs to be called out as a scam, every time.
Aw c’mon, the suggestion that one scam be used as a rationale to curtail another scam (the notion that a country will benefit by recruiting new permanent residents who are unlikely ever to assimilate) should be considered!
It’s clear that Alex is applying sarcasm to the Global Warming scam. One quibble only: Siberia would become arable but the Sahara would merely be equally inhospitable.
I thought that the change in rainfall patterns would actually return the Sahara to the Roman bread basket.
Alex, don’t tell me you believe in the scam. Don’t tell me that you think, like Tim, that pandering to the perpetrators of the scam is a sensible tactic. A scam needs to be called out as a scam, every time.
Aw c’mon, the suggestion that one scam be used as a rationale to curtail another scam (the notion that a country will benefit by recruiting new permanent residents who are unlikely ever to assimilate) should be considered!
It’s clear that Alex is applying sarcasm to the Global Warming scam. One quibble only: Siberia would become arable but the Sahara would merely be equally inhospitable.