Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Banks warned to ‘mobilise all forces' to save the economy from climate change-induced disaster

Another stupid prophecy.  Global warming prophecies NEVER come true

The world’s most powerful banks have issued a warning that climate change could trigger the next global financial crisis.

In an expansive new report, the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) told its members they had to start including climate change in their thinking about the stability of the economy.

During the global financial crisis some central banks intervened to save private banks and insurance firms as part of a program to protect the economy.

The BIS said this could be the template used in the case of climate change.

“In the worst-case scenario, central banks may have to confront a situation where they are called upon by their local constituencies to intervene as climate rescuers of last resort,” it said.

The BIS warned that economic models mapping out possible climate change scenarios were “inherently incapable” of dealing with the many overlapping forces that would lead to a lower-emissions economy.

“Fundamentally, climate-related risks will remain largely uninsurable or unable to be hedged as long as system-wide action is not taken,” the BIS said.

It urged central bankers to “be more proactive” in pushing governments on the transition to a greener economy, while also urging governments to steer financial institutions and businesses towards accounting for climate-related risks in their investment decisions.


What Doomsayers Won’t Tell You About Earth’s Climate History

Absent historical context, extreme weather can be overhyped in ways that lead uninformed voters to conclude that acts of God such as severe droughts and floods never happened before humans began using fossil fuels.

In fact, extreme weather has occurred with monotonous regularity for millions of years.

Below is an infinitesimal sampling of the endless multitude of catastrophic weather events in Earth’s past, many of which occurred long before the Industrial Revolution.

 *  The Great Hurricane of 1780 killed 30,000 people in the Caribbean.

 *  Epic dust storms in the 1930s caused catastrophic ecological damage to the Central Plains of the U.S. and Canada.

 *  Massive flooding that hit Tokyo, Japan, in 1910 destroyed more than 400,000 homes.

 *  Consecutive years of extreme weather took the lives of one-third of the population during the Russian Famine of 1601-1603.

 *  In 1927, weeks of heavy rains in Mississippi caused flooding that covered 27,000 square miles, leaving entire towns and surrounding countryside submerged up to a depth of 30 feet.

 *  A catastrophic hurricane that hit sparsely populated Sea Island, Georgia in 1893 killed 2,000 people.

 *  The Blizzard of 1888 was so extreme that snow and ice covered the entire northeastern U.S., from Maine to the Chesapeake Bay.

 *  On Sept. 8, 1900, a Cat-4 hurricane obliterated the island of Galveston, Texas, killing an estimated 10,000 residents.

 *  In 1889, heavy rains that lasted for days caused massive flooding in Jamestown, PA, killing 2,200.

 *  Caused by a protracted drought, the Bengal Famine of 1770 killed 10 million people in South Asia.

 *  And, for those who believe in the Bible, Genesis 7:12 reports that rain fell upon the earth for 40 days and 40 nights, an extreme weather event by any definition.

What you’ve just read is a tiny slice of Earth’s turbulent climate history that global warming doomsayers hope voters will never know.

And, because there’s an agenda behind climate hysteria that has nothing to do with “saving the planet” – I wrote about that agenda here – there’s not much they won’t do to trick voters to believe that global warming is causing the environment to fall apart at the seams.

They even changed the name of the alleged threat.

Switching gears: Why “global warming” came to be called “climate change”

When the accelerated warming trend that began in the 1980s ran out of steam in 1997, an extended leveling-off period set in.

Instead of acknowledging their dire predictions of unstoppable rising temperatures were embarrassingly wrong, climate doomsayers came up with a new tag for the alleged threat.

What was once referred to almost exclusively as “global warming” was quietly given an alter ego: “climate change.”

Since global temperatures were in a virtual flatline, claims of cataclysmic warming were no longer believable.

Rather than admitting they were wrong and looking for another way to destroy capitalism, the doomsayers simply switched gears and invented a clever new trick to frighten voters with terrifying scenarios of imminent environmental calamity.

Since runaway warming wasn’t happening, they concocted the specious narrative that extreme weather events, every one of them, are caused by, you guessed it: climate change.

Almost overnight, climate change was made the scapegoat for every severe hurricane, drought, flood, heatwave, and blizzard that appeared, as if such unpleasant things had never before occurred.

MORE here

The Green assault on home ownership

With millennials postponing or wholly ignoring marriage while dealing with heavy student loan debt and greater mobility, home ownership for many Americans under 35 may not be as important a goal as it has been for the entirety of the American experiment. Higher prices even for entry-level homes may also be a contributor.

This shying away from home ownership has created an environment in which those who want to destroy the right to private property can find an audience. Thus it should be no surprise that UCLA urban planning professor Kian Goh, in an op ed in far-left magazine The Nation, wrote that, “If we want to keep cities safe in the face of climate change, we need to seriously question the ideal of private homeownership.”

Like wolves sensing weakness, some politicians have also jumped at the opportunity to propose a future without single-family homeowners. Maryland state legislator Vaughn Stewart wants to eliminate zoning regulations that protect single-family neighborhoods and instead mandate construction of tenements that will destroy property values in those “high-opportunity” neighborhoods.

Then Stewart, a white millennial who lives in űber-rich Montgomery County, throws in the race card, ignoring well-enforced legislation that prohibits discrimination in housing. These property-value destroying steps, including ending “weaponized zoning codes” that push people of color and the working class “to the crumbling margins of cities and towns.”

Yup! Just as some far leftists want to take away private health insurance from 150 million Americans, others now want to take away the private property rights exercised by 83 million households!

Fortunately, current U.S. housing policy has a different idea. It’s called “Homeownership: The American Dream.”

That’s the title of an article by Rachelle Levitt, Director of the Research Utilization Division of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research. Levitt pledged that increasing the rate of home ownership and the economic benefits that home ownership confers, continues to be a government and societal goal. This, so HUD will continue to ensure that the opportunity to seize this part of the American Dream is available to as many Americans as possible.

According to Levitt, “For many Americans, owning a home is an essential part of the American dream that conveys a number of economic benefits. Such as the ability to accumulate wealth and access credit by building home equity. Also to reduce housing costs through the mortgage interest deduction and gain long-term savings over the cost of renting.”

Now, while this may not be true for those who frequently relocated from city to city or for single adults not willing to rent out unused rooms in the typical three-bedroom bungalow, home ownership indeed makes all the difference in net worth.

Evidence is ample, but the fact that U.S. minority home ownership rates are just 46.3 percent (compared to 73 percent for whites) is a major reason that, according to Federal Reserve estimates, the median net worth of white families is nearly 10 times that of black families. Similarly, minority homeowners were twice as likely to face foreclosures than white homeowners in the wake of the 2008 big banks bailout.

This makes good fodder for those playing the race card. But then there are the millennials, who are facing a collective student loan debt [thanks to government and academia conspiring, perhaps unintentionally, to enslave even the brightest and best] of about $1.5 trillion. This is the primary reason even well-salaraied millennials are delaying home ownership, as reported by Casey Bond in the Huffington Post.

Bond cited a survey by the National Association of Realtors found that 83 percent of millennials ages 22 to 35 who have delayed home ownership, said they did so because of student loan debt. Bond quotes millennial certified financial planner Brian Face to illustrate the idea that many millennials are choosing to rent because it affords them better personal and financial opportunities. Face says:“Our generation is more about experiences,” and “the bottom line is you have to give up something in order to be a homeowner.”

With socialism, as taught in America’s public schools, gaining in popularity among the younger generation and a declining belief in (or even hatred of) the relationship between home ownership and the American Dream, it is not surprising that academics like Professor Goh are blaming climate change in part on home ownership itself.

Goh opines: “Cheap energy—both the monetary price of subsidized gasoline and the hidden costs of fossil fuels—and the idealization of individual homeownership have created the scorching landscapes we face today. Cheap energy is untenable in the face of climate emergency. And individual homeownership should be seriously questioned.”

In the face of ever-increasing, and ever more radical, socialist propaganda, is it possible that private property rights may go the way of freedom of speech and the right to bear arms? The social engineers of the Left surely hope so – but even Goh admits that, “Even with the threats of climate change and rampant fire looming, the ideals of the American Dream that have been instilled for more than 150 years [and which have blinded us to other possibilities (sic)] will be difficult to dispel.”



Three current articles below

Amusingly empty-headed Leftism

Leftists run as if from the plague if they encounter conservative discourse.  They have to.  So much of what they believe is contrary to the facts that they have a desperate need not to be proved wrong.  Conservatives have no such fears.  Conservatives just want to know what the facts are. Conservatism is built around the facts.  Mr Gradgrind was probably a conservative.

So I read Leftist articles almost daily.  They can have useful facts in them but never the whole facts.  So I had a look at the current article below from the far-Left "New Matilda" site. It is written by Rosie Latimer, who is a medical student. I feel sorry for any patients she may one day have.  The heading on her article reads "Climate Change Is Science Not Politics. So Can We Talk About It Yet?"

Yet she mentions NOT ONE scientific fact in her article. She probably knows none. She uses "science" as a sort of magic word that opens all doors.  She relies on a fictitious "consensus" among scientists to "prove" the reality of global warming.  Has no-one ever told her that once there was a consensus among all good men that the earth was flat?  Science relies on facts, not opinions.

I reproduce just her opening paragraphs below.  I give the link for you to read the whole article if you are interested in any more "ad hominem" fallacies

Australia is under attack from unprecedented bushfires, which are decimating our country, leaving a trail of physical, mental, and emotional destruction. Many have lost loved ones, homes, and some of our native plants and animals are facing extinction.

People are suffering under the toxic smoke that is billowing throughout Australia and the Pacific.

Yet in the face of this, our government and the Murdoch media contend this is not the time to discuss climate change, because the discussion of climate change is a political issue.

Climate change is not a political issue.

There is overwhelming scientific consensus that global warming is occurring, caused by humans emitting greenhouse gases. The world has drawn links between Australia’s love affair with a coal-based economy and the bushfires ravaging our great nation.

This should be a bi-partisan issue, an issue that unites us all. So why is it a Liberal calling card to deny climate change, and a Labor calling card to let them?


Climate change rally turns ugly in Melbourne as angry demonstrators clash with police and Extinction Rebellion protesters bury their heads in the sand at a popular beach

They are just attention-seekers getting high on their own righteousness

Thousands of protesters have marched through Melbourne calling for immediate climate change action and for Prime Minister Scott Morrison to be sacked.

There was a heightened police presence as the activists gathered at the State Library and walked through the city on Saturday afternoon.

One impassioned activist decided to target the on-duty officers by screaming in their direction and leaning uncomfortably close.

A police officer was forced to warn the angry protester to 'back off' and push him away.

The rally, organised by Uni Students for Climate Justice, is part of rolling January demonstrations for the city 'to demand real action on climate change and justice for the communities devastated by the fires'.

'These fires are the result of decades of climate destruction at the hands of fossil fuel industry and their mates in Canberra,' the event description said.

Activists are fighting for a levy on fossil fuel companies, the removal of Mr Morrison from office and firefighters to be paid for their work, among other demands.

Organisers estimated about 2,000 people took part in Saturday's event.

The march came one-day after Extinction Rebellion activists buried their heads in the sand to demand the government declare a climate emergency.

About 300 people descended on Inverloch Beach, about two hours south-east of Melbourne, for the 'peaceful' protest on Friday.

The demonstration comes amid a catastrophic and fatal bushfire season, which has ripped through the state's East Gippsland region.

The protest saw activists dig holes in the sand to bury their heads and lie on the side of the shore, Nine News reported.

Protester Nicky Miller described the protest as 'symbolism' for Australia's lack of action in reducing emissions.

A number of protesters displayed signs slamming the government for its reliance on fossil fuels.

The colourful demonstrators sung there was a 'climate crisis' with the assistance of ukuleles and other instruments.

Leticia Liang referred to the bushfires when explaining why she took part in the protest.

'I don't want my children to adapt to hazy days, I don't want me children to adapt to smoke and fires,' she said.

Lynn Atkinson from Extinction Rebellion said the location of the protest - Inverloch Beach - was eroding 'rapidly'.

Jessica Harrison, also from the activist group, said: 'We want our lovely beach to be preserved, this beach has eroded more than 30 metres in the last four to five years.'

Extinction Rebellion said they expected 100 protesters to attend the demonstration but the 300-strong crowd represented the local community are 'concerned' and 'need action'.


Government is not even trying to reduce fuel for fires

A FIRE fighter has savaged the Queensland Government's hazard reduction burning process, claiming there was state-owned land that wasn't being monitored for fuel loads. Will Wilson, who is stationed in Mt Alma, West of Gladstone, said the local brigade had also stopped telling authorities about "intense fuel loads" building up because there were too many hoops to jump through.

"There's no one that drives along the highway that says 'There's a massive fuel load'," he said "There's no one checking fuel loads at those locations apart from landholders who don't own the land."

The first officer, who's been with the brigade for about 25 years, said the land which runs parallel to a highway was a big instigator for fires. "We've never been notified by main roads that we need to do some fuel reduction on their land," he said

Mr Wilson said it was not the volunteers' job to monitor areas such as rail corridors and main roads and called for financial incentives to better protect the community.

A Government spokesman said government agencies conducted hazard reduction burns on state-owned land only when it was safe to do so.  "Activities include hazard reduction bums, fireline maintenance, mechanical clearing and targeted community education," he said. "More than one million hectares of national parks were treated by planned burns last year. That is the most hectares treated in eight years."

Frank McKee, a fire warden for the Boyne Valley, said it was "all but impossible" to get all government departments to agree to hazard reduction burns on state-owned land. "You have to jump through hoops so high it's ridiculous," he said.

Asked why he thought it was hard to get approvals, Mr McKee said it was due to concerns about risk. "They (authorities) think 'Well what if it (fire) gets away'," he said.

Mr McKee also said officers were required to tell the Government whether there were endangered trees on land needing burning.

"They should be able to have land with no more than a seven-year build up (of fuel load)," he said. "Anything over seven years is uncontrollable."

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 18 January, 2020


For more postings from me, see  DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC and AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. Home Pages are   here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  

Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here


No comments: