+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 11100
Total Topics: 250
Most Online Today: 2
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Author Topic: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi  (Read 9379 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15381
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
« Reply #240 on: November 29, 2018, 11:53:45 am »
 
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click here to subscribe.

November 29, 2018



WSJ    Opinion 😈 Page Thinks Hundreds Of Billions Of Dollars of Climate Damages Are ďAffordableĒ

To those who have already suffered from climate impacts, like the Native Americans displaced by sea level rise in Louisiana and permafrost melt in Alaska, or those who lost their homes in wildfires or lives in heat waves, the Wall Street Journalís opinion page has a message: youíre expendable.

Thatís the gist of a pair of pieces responding to the NCA (National Climate Assessment) this week. The report says explicitly that climate change is already making extreme weather like hurricanes and wildfires worse, is already raising sea levels to the point that coastal communities are flooding on sunny days, and is already hurting the health of Americans across the country. Despite this, all the Journal seems to care about is money.

In a piece published on Monday, Steve Koonin 😈 argues that the report says ďthe overall economic impact of human-caused climate change is expected to be quite small.Ē To reiterate, this is the report that says many coastal communities will likely flood daily regardless of emission reductions, and that the entire $3.6 trillion dollar coastal real estate market is on the line.

The NCA also suggests there will be hundreds of billions of dollars in economic losses, primarily from three factors. First, Americans dying prematurely means lots of hospital spending but not much else (turns out the dead donít buy much). Second, there will be losses in outdoor worker productivity as entire swaths of the South becomes so hot that sustained outdoor work would literally be lethal. And thirdly, sea level rise will put coastal communities under water, literally and financially.

But because the economy will grow between now and then, Koonin claims that the costs wonít be so bad. As a country, weíll be four times richer by 2090, so whatís a few hundred billion dollars lost every year by then?

Holman Jenkins Jr. 👹 follows Kooninís lead, and on Tuesday put a finer point on his misplaced priorities of profits over people.

In reference to the reportís $510 billion in potential losses by 2090, representing thousands of dead Americans, Jenkins quips that ďpaying this bill would be a nuisance, not Armageddon.Ē

Sure, a nuisance. What a great way to describe grandmothers dropping dead of heat stroke, or children gasping for air as asthma rates in communities of color climb even higher.

Jenkins helpfully advises the climate community, which heís spent years insulting, to slip a carbon tax into a larger tax reform package, because ďthe biggest holdup to direct action on climate is showing that preventing these changes would be cheaper than enduring them.Ē

Apparently, $500 billion dollars a year in dead Americans, flooded coastal communities and the scorching of the Southís agriculture industry is affordable, but switching from fossil fuels to renewables now is just too expensive.

While most deniers are clearly funded by fossil fuels, itís starting to feel like the WSJís biggest advertiser might be the coffin-makers.

Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15381
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
« Reply #241 on: December 07, 2018, 06:27:32 pm »
No, it's not a lie. I still remember the thread where you went off on me for daring not to blindly believe your theories about ancient aliens and high-tech Atlantis type societies. What happened to all of those theories, AG?    Did you finally realize it was all nonsense you were following because it sounded intellectual and made you feel superior to those without the secret "knowledge"?   

Only among tarantulas could be it "trolling" or "sophistry" to simply be honest and admit you do not know something well enough to write intelligently about it. This is what you should be doing when it comes to a great many things you have written about, but wanna-be tyrants will never admit their intellectual blind spots and personal weaknesses.

If their is one thing you have NEVER done, it's "admit intellectual blind spots and weaknesses". You are always too busy inventing said "blind spots" and "weaknesses" in your perceived opponent. Disingenuous posturing does not qualify as an admission of ZIP, counselor. 

Deny all you want and keep up the false accusations, as is your wont. I understand that "works for you" so you can avoid discussing the Climate Crises issue objectively. So, go head, continue keeping your Denier head firmly ensconced in your status quo worshipping descending colon. The fact that you consistently refuse to acknowledge the validity of the dire need for a worldwide effort to get the global economy off of fossil fuels (and other biosphere degrading human activities), to the point that you disingenuously claim that "tinkering" with this complex CAPITALIST system this way will "unjustly hurt the poor" (a Fossil Fuel Industry Propaganda Denier talking point for the last TWO decades, at least) means that you, like the others that cheerlead the status quo, have blood ☠️ on your hands. Those of us advocating a clean energy based economy for a viable biosphere, do not, despite your Orwellian attempts to demonize us.   

Be sure and IGNORE the following post because, if you read it, it will make your head hurt.

Have a nice deluded day.

Climate Crisis Critical Issue in 2020 Elections Ė Jane Sanders

December 7, 2018

Jane Sanders tells Paul Jay that voters shouldnít support candidates who claim to be progressive, but donít prioritize the fight against fossil fuel interests


Story Transcript

PAUL JAY: Welcome to The Real News Network. Iím Paul Jay.

The Gathering, a meeting of 200 or so progressive thought leaders invited to Burlington, Vermont, was a meeting to talk about what comes next in the coming 2020 elections to help create a vision, a policy framework, for what candidates might run on, what people might fight for. It comes at a rather momentous time in human history, as I said in one of the other interviews; 2020 is maybe the most important election anyplace, ever, given whatís at stake. The Gathering was called by Jane OíMeara Sanders, whoís co-founder of the Sanders Institute; now serves as a fellow. Jane served as a political consultant, has held appointed and elected office, and Jane was the driving force behind the Gathering. And she now joins us here in our studio at the Gathering. Thanks for joining us.


JANE SANDERS: Thanks, Paul.

PAUL JAY: Your hopes going inóand I heard this a little bit in the email back and forthóis we donít want to spend all this time trashing Trump. We really want to talk policy and what a different world might look like. How do you feel that was achieved?

JANE SANDERS: I was astounded. I mean, we had 49 speakers in 48 hours. And actually, I think a few added on during the weekend. It was thought provoking, inspiring, much better than I had ever envisioned. I had pretty high thoughts for this weekend. We cameóyou mentioned thought leaders. And what I realized by the end is theyíre not just progressive thought leaders. They are bringing the heart to the, their hearts to the causes, to the issues that we talked about. Theyíre leading from values and principles, and then their intellect informs the rest. But the first layer is the values and the principles that we espouse, for democracy and for human dignity.

PAUL JAY: The times we live in are, as I said, this may beóthe coming election may be the most important ever, to a large extent because of climate change. If a climate denier is elected again, or if a corporate Democrat is elected who pays lip service to the climate crisis and doesnít take effective action, weíre kind of screwed. Weíre already close to 1.5 or 2 degrees aboveóin terms of warming, above pre-industrial averages. The tipping point is really within sight. In terms of the messaging of the extent of the crisis and what to do about it, do you think that was addressed here?

JANE SANDERS: I think it was. I think that people walked away with the concept that, and with the realization, that time is running out. And what we need to do is not just ask people what to do or inform people about the issue.

One of the things that we need to do, and the reason for the Gathering, was to amplify each otherís voices, resonate on the issues. We need leadership that actually says, Iím sorry, this is a crisis. We need to address it now. Not next year, not the year after. Itís leadership at the local, the statewide, the national, the international level. Not just people who are elected, but people who want to make a difference in the world.

At the end of the climate crisis panel, Bill McKibben said that we need to have healthcare, Medicare for All, a $15 minimum wage, and 100% renewable. Those are not the only things. But the 100% renewable and the focus on the climate crisis has to be at the outset of anybody running for office. Where do you stand? Where do you stand? Not [crosstalk]

PAUL JAY: Absolutely. But Iím not hearing it. Even with progressive candidates itís like, I have to say even to some extent Bernie, although heís certainly better than any of the others that actually have a mainstream role. But the extent of the threat is not likeóitís got to be front and center. Weíre often, itís like a shopping list, healthcare, Medicare for all, $15, climate. Well, climate is, it doesnít matter if you get $15 an hour if we ainít here. There seems to be a feeling both amongst people that work on this issue in the climate sector, people involved in political campaigns, that if you talk about the extent of the crisis youíre just going to scare people. Well, shouldnít we be scaring people?

JANE SANDERS: I think so. I think youíre absolutely right. And we have to startóI believe a lot of people have conferences, and thatís the end game. Letís have a conference. This was a jumping off point. We want to have the conference inform future action. What I heard from the questions from the attendees, the hallway conversations was that we have to hold people accountable. Itís not from a perception of you have to vote for this or vote for that. What do you understand about the climate crisis? Where do you stand on it, what are you willing to do, and what are you not willing to do? Donít talk to me about in sound bites, donít talk to me to say climate crisis is really bad, but no, Iím not going to fight the pipelines in the states. Iím not going to not take fossil fuel industry money. I think with the climate crisis, I think more than anything else we have to draw a very clear line and say these are the expectations. If you donít do this, I donít care how progressive you are, supposedly, itís notóweíre not interested.

PAUL JAY: Itís got to be a criteria people use on who they vote for. But to do that weíve got to get into those sections amongst working people who right now, climate is barely on the top 20 of their list. We did some work in southern Pennsylvania, weíve done work around Baltimore where weíre based. And without doubt, the day-to-day suffering is such that people, they want that addressed. This thing has to be framed in a way that it is today. Itís not some great future prospect. And itís your kids at stake, your grandkids at stake. The messaging is not getting through much to ordinary people.

JANE SANDERS: Well, when you look at the floods and the torrential rains and the fires, there is no analysis of that on the news. They cover it like voyeurs to say, oh, look at this terrible thing thatís happening. These people are helping, this is good news. The community is coming together, great. But they donít ever ask why. Why is this occurring? Cover the science. And that is not happening. They need to cover the science.

PAUL JAY: Every day.

JANE SANDERS: Yeah, every day. But theyíre not, and we need to insist they do.

PAUL JAY: Weíre going to be, we are. and weíre going to be every day doing science. Because whatís missing from the whole discourse for ordinary people, people coming in on the issue, is the sense of urgency. People that understand whatís going on, we feel a sense of urgency, but thereís still this feeling that you canít tell people that because itís going to overwhelm them. Itís like treating people like kids.

JANE SANDERS: Partly. But I also think that people donít want to haveówant to just focus on a problem without a solution. Many of the people that are speaking about it or looking for votes donít want to deal with the solutions. I do think that we have an opportunity at this point in time to say, to lay out what this administration has been doing in terms of rolling back air and water and all this, and all these regulations, and to recognize the support theyíre giving to the fossil fuel industry with our tax dollars and not to renewables, which would help us. But to be able to say there is an answer.

The House just turned, and we should be making it very clear to the Democrats that are in control of the House, are you going to do something? If youíre not going to do something, thank you very much, weíre not going to be supporting you. If we say to the people, this is what you can do, and this is what we expect of you as leaders in your community or as elected leaders, we need your voice out there, then we can make a change. I think people need to not just focus only on the climate crisis, because as you say, thatís what everybody is saying. Everybody is going to be very nervous about it and very concerned. They should be, but we have to give them a path forward. We have to say how are you going to be able to make this-

PAUL JAY: Well, one of the things that came out of the conference was the discussion of a new green deal, a Green New Deal, I should say, which seems to make a lot of sense. It makes a lot of sense when you already understand why we need a new green dealóGreen New Deal. Most people donít even get the urgency of that.

JANE SANDERS: I think the bully pulpit really matters. The people in that room, and hopefully the people that watched on livestream, and the people that watch the things weíll be putting out in the future at the Sanders Institute, will understand more. And Real News. Youíve been talking to people this entire time to have the Real News be covering the science, covering the facts, and having people who are in a position to lead their communities to solution. That helps. Now, the problem is that so many of the solutions, or so many of the approaches, seem to be protesting only. Thatís not what weóI mean, protests are very important. Thatís not enough. What we need to do is demand accountability, demand that they donít take money from pipeline, they donít support banks that fund pipelines. We need to say to our representatives and to the media, we expect you to ask and answer serious questions that are complex and not just give us sound bites.

PAUL JAY: I got a suggestion for the Sanders Institute.

JANE SANDERS: Okay.

PAUL JAY: One of the things I learned over the weekend was how Barcelona has created a publicly owned energy company. It seems to me more of that kind of program, like hereís what, if you actually took over a city, major city in this country, hereís what a city can do, hereís what a state could do. Also in terms of Congress, I think thereís going to be a real fight over whether real hearings are going to be held over what to do about climate change or trash Trump. I have no problem with trashing Trump. But if the focus is on that itís just more of the same rhetorical battle.

JANE SANDERS: I agree. I think, unfortunately, the Democrats have a great opportunity, and unfortunately Iím concerned that they are going to blow it and focus on investigations, investigations, investigations. People want them to pay attention to the real issues facing their lives. And whatís happening now, I know, I really want Medicare for All, I really want $15 minimum wage, we want a lot of things. And a lot of new ideas and replicable policies came out of this conference. In terms of the climate crisis, what we need to do is focus on it, and if they donít deliver to the voters that put them in, I think that itís over. I think itís over for that party. I donít, I think-

PAUL JAY: Itís over for us humans.


JANE SANDERS: Well, but no. Because I think if they donít focus on real change, on effecting real change, especially in this area, I think that we will be able to lead from below.

PAUL JAY: The logicóI mean, other than the fact that a whole section of the Democratic Party is very tied up with finance and fossil fuel, but set that aside for a second. They accept the dictatorship of corporate media. What I mean by that is the corporate news media is making a fortune out of this partisan battle. Not only does it drive ratings, because itís like watching a football game, then the parties spend a billion, over a billion dollars, billions on advertising and campaigns. The partisan war, the news media loves. The logic goes if we have a hearing on climate change they wonít cover it.

JANE SANDERS: Thatís what they said, actually. They have said that to us, that the ratings on climate change donít matter. Then, at the same time, the ratings on fires and floods, they cover ad nauseum. Now, how hard would it be to cover them in a way that said these are the facts, this is climate change at work. This is why itís happening. And this is what you can expect to happen later. These parts of the world are going to be underwater, and thereís going to be mass migration, and thereís going to be food shortages. They donít have to cover it all at once. But when you look at things and you see the same footage for three days of terrible personal pain that people are experiencing, the loss of their homes and of their communities and even their cities, instead of saying, okay, we donít have to put that on again, we can keep informing the people. Thatís my, one of my concerns, is I think the fourth estate has been letting us down. A democracy requires an informed electorate. The media, the fourth estate, is supposed to inform the public. Theyíre not doing that. Theyíre selling ratings. But theyíre not even thinking deeply about it. Because if they covered the fires and explained them, theyíd get the same ratings.

PAUL JAY: I agree with you. But I have no expectation that corporate news media is going to change. This Democratic-controlled House, if theyíre serious about climate change, they can create hearings with as much drama as the Kavanaugh hearings. You know, subpoena the head of Exxon, create a real dramatic presentation.

JANE SANDERS: Like they did with tobacco years ago, under Henry Waxman.

PAUL JAY: Exactly. But they have to want to do it. And thatís going to be a fight.

JANE SANDERS: It is going to be a fight, because people donít want to take on the banks. They donít want to take on the fossil fuel industry. They donít want to take on the large donors and the big corporations. My hope is there will beóand I know there will be a group of people that will in the new Congress. And the Progressive Caucus in the Congress is pretty good.

PAUL JAY: There is a group now pushing for hearings on a Green New Deal.

JANE SANDERS: I think weíll see some, for once, moving in the right direction. And I think the fact that under the Trump administration so many things have been so difficult for not just climate crisis, but everything, that I think people are beginning to realize we canít take six more years of this. We canít possibly survive that well. I guess thatís dramatic but-

PAUL JAY: A lot of people wonít survive.

JANE SANDERS: Yeah, a lot of people wonít. I think people are getting that. I have more faith in the American people. I think that theyíre going to pay attention if they can be informed. Thatís why places like The Real News and the Sanders Institute and all the people that were here from different organizations are so important, becauseóyou started it with I donít think they know. That education is extremely important.

PAUL JAY: Great, thanks very much.

JANE SANDERS: Thank you.

PAUL JAY: Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

https://therealnews.com/stories/climate-crisis-critical-issue-in-2020-elections-jane-sanders



Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

+-Recent Topics

Money by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 09:56:45 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 09:37:29 pm

Fossil Fuel Profits Getting Eaten Alive by Renewable Energy! by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 09:10:55 pm

Apocalyptic Humor by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 02:34:18 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 12:17:36 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
December 13, 2018, 07:15:13 pm

War Provocations and Peace Actions by AGelbert
December 13, 2018, 04:16:22 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
December 12, 2018, 09:35:12 pm

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
December 12, 2018, 09:25:57 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
December 12, 2018, 05:07:12 pm