World Bank President: We Totally Need To Tackle “Climate Change”… For The Kids

It’s always most amusing when Warmists, who tend to hold a Progressive (nice fascist) ideology, one which is considered far to the Left, start yammering about something being “for the kids”. Theres are the same folks who fully endorse abortion on demand for any reason and on any whim. And we’re supposed to use taxpayer money to pay for it. We’re only supposed to indoctrinate, er, educate kids in Government schools. Well, Other People’s kids, that is. We’re supposed to do this and that “for the kids”, such as opening the borders. And, per fossil fuels jet setting World Bank President Jim Yong Kim

Tackling Climate Change — For Our Kids

If you have children or grandchildren, you probably have wondered what the world will be like for them in 20 or 30 years. Will it be a better place? Will climate change upend their lives?

It’s something I have thought about a lot since I became the president of the World Bank Group in July 2012. Within my first few months on the job, I was briefed on an upcoming climate change report, and the findings shocked me. I knew then that tackling climate change would be one of my top priorities as the leader of a development institution whose mission is ending extreme poverty by 2030 and boosting shared prosperity. If we don’t start controlling climate change, the mission to end poverty will fail.

The linking of “controlling climate change” (yup, nuttbaggery) with poverty is just the latest attempt to force “climate change” legislation (treaties, agreements, etc), following on notions such as sustainability and diversity and many others.

Mr. Kim then goes on to highlight a UN IPCC computer model (snicker) which spells out DOOOOOOOOM if we don’t Do Something, despite the fact that 95% of the models have failed. And, of course, blames every weather event on Hotcoldwetdry, taking the party line of extreme weather and bigger and badder storms. In contradiction of real world data, of course. This leads to

We need a plan for the planet.

And the world needs to put the brakes on climate change. But any plan to tackle climate change can’t sacrifice economic growth if we hope to end extreme poverty, reduce inequality, and ensure that poor people gain access to energy.

We need to decouple growth from carbon emissions.

Huh. Interesting. If that’s the case, will Mr. Kim forgo his own use of fossil fuels? He’s certainly spent quite a bit of time jet setting around the world. Will he demand that all who attend the Managing the Carbon Bubble event on April 15th not use fossil fueled travel? Anyway, he has 5 ideas to “decouple growth from carbon emissions” (despite this being unscientific terminology, as we are discussing CO2)

  • Put a price on carbon. (despite virtually every carbon market collapsing.
  • Phase out fossil fuel subsidies. (of course, they are mostly tax breaks, not subsidies, and every country which relies on fossil fuels has a much higher standard of living than those who don’t)
  • Encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy. (left unsaid is that this would be enforced by Big Government under penalty of law)
  • Build low-carbon cities. (he really wants this for “developing countries”, which would still have no actual economic activity, just destitute people living in hovels in cities)
  • Enable climate-smart agriculture. (seriously, these people can’t build a website (among others), do you want them in charge of food production?)

He ends with

These five areas of action could help the world get off the path toward 4 degree of warming. For our part, the World Bank Group is trying to build climate change considerations into everything we do, because we know that if we don’t confront climate change, there will be no hope of ending poverty or boosting shared prosperity. The longer we delay, the higher the cost will be to do the right thing for our planet and our children.

Notice that nowhere does he recommend that…..yup, here it comes!….Warmists forgo their own use of fossil fuels. Nor does he even recommend eliminating the use of fossil fuels. The first two, carbon markets and fossil fuels “subsidies” would benefit the rich, who wouldn’t be bothered much by purchasing carbon offsets (which is like paying a speeding ticket for Bad Behavior rather than giving up speeding) nor the massive rise in the cost of living due to the large increase in the cost of fossil fuels. If it’s “for the kids”, Warmists should immediately give up fossil fuels and make their own lives “carbon neutral”.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Leave a Comment

Permalinks


Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend