I know some readers will read the headline and simply assume that, because I am a conservative, I will naturally find an issue with something President Biden is doing. And while there are a host of things being done by the president that I do not like – mainly because the policy isn’t conservative – when it comes to Biden’s climate plan, I hate it simply because it is objectively stupid and reckless.
Before explaining how it’s stupid and reckless, let me just make one thing clear: I am not a climatologist. And like 99%+ of Americans, I don’t actually have an opinion on what, if anything, should be done to combat climate change. I know that there are many climate scientists who are warning that we do need to make changes, and I am not one to argue with that. I don’t know if they are right or wrong, and it’s likely that you, the reader, don’t either. Any opinion we have on the matter is due to our political allegiances, not because we are knowledgeable on the subject. However, if we do implement changes as the scientists are suggesting, those changes have to contain at least a morsel of sense for me to support it, and my opposition is based on common sense, not ideology.
With that preface, let’s dig in. On Wednesday, President Biden’s climate envoy, John Kerry pushed Biden’s Green New Deal-inspired agenda to tackle climate change. Biden’s ideas for the US to combat climate change would cost the United States some $2 trillion, according to the Biden administration. That is a ton of money, an amount that, if spent, had better go to good use, right? I think everyone can agree on that.
So, will that $2 trillion go to good use? Nope, not even according to John Kerry. President Biden wants to spend all that money on lowering the US’s output of carbon emissions. Scientists say that carbon emissions cause the globe to warm, hence lower carbon emissions are necessary. OK. The problem is, Kerry admitted during his own press conference that it would make no difference if the US got all the way down to zero carbon emissions! You see, the United States produces less than 10% of the world’s carbon emissions. In Kerry’s own words, “When almost 90 percent of all off the planet’s global emissions come from outside of US borders… We could go to zero tomorrow and the problem isn’t solved.”
If spending this $2 trillion won’t even make a dent in the fight against global warming, why on Earth would we spend it? When questioned on it, Kerry told a reporter, “The science tells us we have to.” But it doesn’t! In fact, “the science” tells us the very opposite – that spending trillions of dollars to lower US emissions will do NOTHING. Until major polluters like China and India lower their own emissions, the US can join every feel-good Paris Climate Accord-type deal and achieve nothing from doing so, besides killing American jobs.
I am not against implementing a plan to fight climate change, even as a conservative. But the least we need to see is that it makes sense. Biden’s plan makes no sense at all. Spend trillions of dollars for no gain? What sort of insanity is that? Big government insanity is what it is. It is stupid, it is reckless, and that is something conservatives and liberals should be able to agree upon.
Each country by itself does nothing. We need cooperation from a lot of countries.
A lot of countries together can have an effect. That’s the point of the Paris agreement.
Biden is having the USA take the lead on this and is encouraging other countries to act.
The 2 Trillion dollars does not get sent to Mars or get flushed down the toilet.
It goes to regular working Americans.
The republicans only want that 2 trillion dollars to go into the pockets of Millionaires.
It’s all garbage, if kerry believed his doomsday claims, why did he buy a house in marthas vineyard which is particularly vulnurable to the sea rise he claims is coming, he also flys in private jets which emit more carbon than if he would fly commercial, the biggest climate change doomsday advocates have the biggest carbon footprints. All this is is a way to grow government and give them more power over the citizenry. Oh and Z the paris agreemnet is non binding and allows countries like china and india to continue to emit at even higher rates, also anyone who believes that you can get to net zero emissions with out nuclear power that the left abhors is a moron. When the climate change doomsayers give up their private jets, yachts, subburban convoys, and multiple mansions, then I may start thinking there is something to this whole climate change thing.
Don’t forget that many of these same elites have oceanfront properties. In fact the Obamas bought an ocean front mansion in December 2019 for almost 12 million dollars. Now, if climate change was real and the oceans are rising to dangerous levels that will swallow up the coastline, would someone as sophisticated and woke as Obama buy an expensive oceanfront home?
By the same token, the $2 Trillion dollar package may have some nice goodies for average Americans but the vast majority of the money will go to line the pockets of Democrat special interests: massive amounts to unions, bailouts for democrat states and cities, “investments” in clean energy (can you say Solyndra?), and just plain slush funds for agencies to sprinkle around to compliant recipients and fellow travelers. Remember Obama’s stimulus package with money for “shovel ready” jobs? He himself later admitted that there weren’t any such jobs. This is the same thing: throw the average people a bone (that their grandchildren are going to pay off) with deficit spending, while making your friends and allies rich. Sick.
The minute republicans are voted out of office, they suddenly remember the deficit. When they are in office, they have no problem increasing the deficit, passing on bills to grandchildren and creating slush funds for political allies.
Fun fact – the last President to balance the budget, was he a republican or a Democrat? Hint: his name rhymes with Flinton.
Moreover, Obama came into office with a crisis that needed fixing. Trump and Bush did not.
Republican politicians may spend like drunken sailors, but they don’t hold a candle to dems. Besides which, thats only the politicians. Grass roots Republicans and Conservatives despise the deficit spending. Having said that, please note the same trend: when Reagan came into office, the military was decimated and interest rates were near 20%. In order to build the military back up to acceptable levels, a lot of money had to be spent and it was well spent: it pushed the USSR over the brink and ended the cold war. And Reagan’s tax cuts set off a 20-year streak of prosperity to offset much of the spending. Clinton came in the beneficiary of the Reagan “peace dividend” and the Republican Congress forced him to adopt spending discipline (welfare reform, eg.) that gave us a balanced budget.
Bush did not come into an economic crisis but got a huge one handed to him on 9/11, which not only decimated the economy but also put a huge strain on military spending. Granted, there is good reason to debate the wisdom and conduct of the War on Terror, but hindsight is 20/20. Back then, the mood, even among Democrats (including Hillary and Biden) was that we had to go to war to prevent another disaster.
Despite best propaganda efforts such as yours, Obama did a lousy job with the economy. Yes, there was a crisis and there’s plenty of blame to go around for that, including Democrat forcing banks to make subprime loans. But Obama’s “recovery” was the worst in history and it was well demonstrated in the Trump years that the problem was the leadership at the top, or the lack thereof.
Trump had to repeat Reagan’s spending to restore a decimated military left my Obama (funny isn’t it how Democrats always claim success based on hollowing out national security?). Moreover, a vast amount of the increased national debt came about as result of Coronavirus spending, a lot of which was absolutely necessary to save and protect lives and to keep even more businesses from failing.
Hey Z
Your statement about the Paris agreement being the answer to solve Climate Change is uninformed.
The biggest polluters are India, China and Russia and they are not required to reduce their carbon output until 2035. The US produces only 10% of the total carbon.
The Climate Czar John Kerry said at a news conference that if the US went to zero carbon emission tomorrow it would have NO effect on the climate
So please explain to me why you want to spend 2 Trillion dollars of taxpayer money to accomplish nothing!
The only reason the other countries want us to be in the Paris agreement is to foot the bill.
The Paris agreement will cost American jobs and cost 2 Trillion Dollars to accomplish nothing.
I see some commenters writing thought out smart points, and others returning with personal attacks and rants.
The truth is, the only way any country will lower their carbon emissions is if America does so. This $2 trillion will not do nothing to lower carbon emissions, it is a step in the direction of the rest of the world doing so.
The problem with some people is, they need instant results and simple solutions. Things are more complicated than that, and this $2 trillion is just one step along the way.
Additionally, those $2 trillion will go into the pockets of the regular people developing, selling and installing solar panels and new technologies, as the rich oil producers lower their market share. They will continue to spend money to produce bogus studies that climate change isn’t real, and the working poor will believe them. But this plan is a step to helping regular people, and helping the entire planet at the same time.
Ruth,
It is refreshing to read your thought-out, and rational post. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, many people nowadays hear a news bulletin or read a headline and pounce with raw emotion. In fact, it seems like much of this past election season was conducted by campaigning to people’s emotions rather than with actual policy or competence – but I digress. I ask you though – as a thinking, rational human; If the problem is indeed as simple as you suggest, a byproduct of today’s need for instant gratification, why then does the government not tell this to the people? It is not unreasonable to expect the people who would be paying the $2T to be capable of comprehending this. Why treat the taxpayers like a bunch of idiots? Explain to them that is a long-term investment that will show returns many years from now. It should not be very complicated. Unless it is not that simple…?
Kefirah kefirah kefirah along with shiduch crisis and corona
We are the technology leader of the world as well as the model for the world.
For example: Tesla which is the best and most advanced electric vehicle Only sells a handful of them in the US, China buys 3.5 million of them a year, Europe and other regions also buy a tremendous amount of them.
True that 2 trillion is a tremendous amount and will probably be sloppily spent, but we will enjoy cleaner air, lower our cancer rate, and the rest of the world will follow us in our techniques thus buy our Green Factory and energy producing equipment.
No country wants to be polluted; We will definitely have a cleaner and cooler world as a result of this.
This headline is not ok.
We are still in golus,
under the mercy of this great country of chesed, and it’s leaders.
You went and sat down and wrote this comment. Kefirah! If Hashem wanted the comment written, he didn’t need you to do it for Him.
Taking care of the planet, for ourselves and others, helping girls find shiduchim, and protecting people’s health, are all things we are supposed to do. Hashem gave the world over to humans, wanting things to be done through them.
Some things are in our hands others are beyond our control. Trying to control those things? Yes kefirah!!!!!!!!
WHat a strange name you chose for yourself.
לשון סגי נהור
The USA should spend the 2T convincing other countries to join in reducing carbon emissions and providing the technologies to reduce them. They should invest in electric vehicle infrastructure. It is one of the largest contributors to green house gasses, can be provided to other countries, and increase the US GDP.