George Orwell's Animal Farm comes true - some animals are more equal than the others. Click here for Zombie's tale.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Sunday, April 29, 2012
There is no respite from India's crony socialists
In her article - ‘Q’ And His Cronies - published in today's The Indian Express, Tavleen Singh writes:
Bofors remains important for another reason and this is that it provides us with the finest example of crony capitalism as it existed in the days of the licence raj. Those leftists and Anna Hazare followers who insist that crony capitalism is a product of economic liberalisation need to pay careful attention to what happened in Bofors. If they do, and if for a brief moment they take off their ideological blinkers, they will see that crony capitalism was the only kind we had in those socialist years.
If there is still crony capitalism possible today, it is mostly because of ministers with too many discretionary powers like A Raja and his inexplicable powers to distribute Spectrum as he liked. And, because government contracts with foreign companies for such things as guns, fighter aircraft and passenger aeroplanes remain shrouded in veils of secrecy.
In earlier times when socialism was our proudly stated economic creed, the possibilities for crony capitalism were limitless. The economy was so tightly controlled by politicians and high officials that only they could decide which ‘businessmen’ needed their help to become millionaires and billionaires. In this process, they themselves often became very, very rich and often this was through money paid into foreign bank accounts. This made it possible for nearly all our bureaucrats and political leaders to send their children abroad for higher studies.
Crony capitalism thrives in countries in which the state controls the economy. It benefits mostly state players which is why our political parties and high officials continue to long wistfully for the license raj. In the Sonia-Manmohan government, this longing manifests itself in such things as the retrospective tax, the attempt to bind down medical students going abroad for their studies and the attempt to perpetuate the licence raj through the misguided Right to Education Act (RTE).
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Should government decide what we may eat, any more than it decides where we live or how long our hair will be?
Who becomes a regulator except someone who wants to regulate? Some regulators come from activist groups that hate industry. Some come from industry and want to convert their government job into a higher-paying industry job. Some just want attention. They know that saying, “X will kill you,” gets more attention than saying that X is probably safe.
Click here to read more
Click here to read more
The main problem with monetary policy is that there is such a thing as monetary policy
Why should government have a monopoly on money supply? I have never been able to understand the rationale for giving government a monopoly over "anything." Money is too important a subject to be left into the hands of a senseless entity as any government.
DETLEV SCHLICHTER has written an excellent article on this subject. Here are some good lines:
My conclusion is straightforward. There should be no policy. The existence of policy is already the problem. What we need is proper capitalism in money and finance. We do not have that now. What we have is limitless state fiat money, quantitative easing, systematic market manipulation, bailouts, regulations, the IMF, the World Bank, the FSA, FDIC, TARP and LTRO. We need proper markets, not more policy, not more manipulation, and not more bureaucracy. And not more fiat money. We need the state to exit the field of money and banking. Completely.
The main problem with monetary policy is that there is such a thing as monetary policy.
The state is the problem. It will not be part of the solution.
Before I tell you what I think should be done, let me give you another reason why I have been so reluctant to offer policy advice. The aim of my book Paper Money Collapse was to expose widespread fallacies and debunk erroneous common wisdom concerning money. It was not to provide a program for reform. The book is meant to be an eye-opener. Almost the entire discussion on money and banking today is based on deeply flawed theories. This is true of the financial markets industry where I worked for 19 years. It is equally true of most of the discussion in the media and, as far as I can see, academia.
DETLEV SCHLICHTER has written an excellent article on this subject. Here are some good lines:
My conclusion is straightforward. There should be no policy. The existence of policy is already the problem. What we need is proper capitalism in money and finance. We do not have that now. What we have is limitless state fiat money, quantitative easing, systematic market manipulation, bailouts, regulations, the IMF, the World Bank, the FSA, FDIC, TARP and LTRO. We need proper markets, not more policy, not more manipulation, and not more bureaucracy. And not more fiat money. We need the state to exit the field of money and banking. Completely.
The main problem with monetary policy is that there is such a thing as monetary policy.
The state is the problem. It will not be part of the solution.
Before I tell you what I think should be done, let me give you another reason why I have been so reluctant to offer policy advice. The aim of my book Paper Money Collapse was to expose widespread fallacies and debunk erroneous common wisdom concerning money. It was not to provide a program for reform. The book is meant to be an eye-opener. Almost the entire discussion on money and banking today is based on deeply flawed theories. This is true of the financial markets industry where I worked for 19 years. It is equally true of most of the discussion in the media and, as far as I can see, academia.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
There is nothing like Gold
DETLEV SCHLICHTER has written an excellent article on the logic of investing in gold. Here are some of my favourite lines from the article.
Let’s look at the logic of investing in gold. When doing so we immediately are confronted with widespread antipathy towards it founded on ignorance and misunderstanding: We gold bugs are not only pessimists who want to make money when the world goes to hell in a hand-basket, we even remove our spending power from the markets for consumer and producer goods and invest our wealth in “barren” and “unproductive” monetary assets. Shame on us!
I use the term “monetary asset” as I do not want here to go into the debate about whether gold is presently money or not. I know that you cannot buy a bus ticket with a gold coin but that is not what we are discussing here. For the purpose of this investigation gold is (almost) equivalent to physical paper money, i.e. to cash under the mattress. The person who invests in bullion does so for the same reason that somebody may hold a large pile of banknotes in a safe, namely to not commit this part of his wealth to consumer goods that may fulfill his present consumption needs or to producer goods that promise an investment return (dividends and interest). He is holding money – that is, gold or physical cash- because he wants to conserve his purchasing power and retain the flexibility of spending that purchasing power on consumer and producer goods some time later but still at the drop of a hat. Money is the most fungible good, the one that can most easily be traded for goods and services. People hold money because they value that flexibility and the maintenance of their purchasing power higher than what they can get for their money at present prices, including what they can get for it in terms of investment goods at present prices.
There are, of course, important differences between gold and cash. The latter is presently slightly more fungible. Remember the bus ticket. On the other hand, there is no limit to how much paper money central banks can produce today. For the paper money holder debasement is not only a risk it is almost a certainty as it is the declared goal of those in charge of the money franchise. I come back to that later.
Click here to read more.
Let’s look at the logic of investing in gold. When doing so we immediately are confronted with widespread antipathy towards it founded on ignorance and misunderstanding: We gold bugs are not only pessimists who want to make money when the world goes to hell in a hand-basket, we even remove our spending power from the markets for consumer and producer goods and invest our wealth in “barren” and “unproductive” monetary assets. Shame on us!
I use the term “monetary asset” as I do not want here to go into the debate about whether gold is presently money or not. I know that you cannot buy a bus ticket with a gold coin but that is not what we are discussing here. For the purpose of this investigation gold is (almost) equivalent to physical paper money, i.e. to cash under the mattress. The person who invests in bullion does so for the same reason that somebody may hold a large pile of banknotes in a safe, namely to not commit this part of his wealth to consumer goods that may fulfill his present consumption needs or to producer goods that promise an investment return (dividends and interest). He is holding money – that is, gold or physical cash- because he wants to conserve his purchasing power and retain the flexibility of spending that purchasing power on consumer and producer goods some time later but still at the drop of a hat. Money is the most fungible good, the one that can most easily be traded for goods and services. People hold money because they value that flexibility and the maintenance of their purchasing power higher than what they can get for their money at present prices, including what they can get for it in terms of investment goods at present prices.
There are, of course, important differences between gold and cash. The latter is presently slightly more fungible. Remember the bus ticket. On the other hand, there is no limit to how much paper money central banks can produce today. For the paper money holder debasement is not only a risk it is almost a certainty as it is the declared goal of those in charge of the money franchise. I come back to that later.
Click here to read more.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Friday, April 20, 2012
Why The Hunger Games Satisfies
The Hunger Games is not explicitly for individual rights or any other political ideal; its power lies in a subtle grasp of what government control does to decent people. Americans subjected to—and forced to pay for—corruption in Congress, the GSA and the Secret Service, and besieged by the TSA and the IRS, may recognize in The Hunger Games a dark world that mirrors our own.
The heroine, Katniss, represents what decent people ought to do back. She knows it is wrong that her life is not her own, so she decides not exactly to play along. Her rebellion begins with a refusal to submit to the government control.
So, there may be a good reason why people are going to see The Hunger Games in record numbers. By drawing her bow, its protagonist aims to live on her terms. Watching the individual target the source of dictatorship – acceptance of the idea that one’s moral duty is service to the state – may resonate with people fed up with three years of being treated like a serf in Obama’s Big Government onslaught.
The Hunger Games is not a movie about kids killing kids. It is a movie about kids being forced by the state to kill kids—and what one child does about it—which makes it a strong warning against the notion of being ruled by the state. Whether that’s why moviegoers are seeing it, that’s why The Hunger Games satisfies. Its timing is perfect.
Click here to read more...
The heroine, Katniss, represents what decent people ought to do back. She knows it is wrong that her life is not her own, so she decides not exactly to play along. Her rebellion begins with a refusal to submit to the government control.
So, there may be a good reason why people are going to see The Hunger Games in record numbers. By drawing her bow, its protagonist aims to live on her terms. Watching the individual target the source of dictatorship – acceptance of the idea that one’s moral duty is service to the state – may resonate with people fed up with three years of being treated like a serf in Obama’s Big Government onslaught.
The Hunger Games is not a movie about kids killing kids. It is a movie about kids being forced by the state to kill kids—and what one child does about it—which makes it a strong warning against the notion of being ruled by the state. Whether that’s why moviegoers are seeing it, that’s why The Hunger Games satisfies. Its timing is perfect.
Click here to read more...
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Why does the government insist on hindering entrepreneurs and rewarding sloth
The Daily Mail has published a really interesting article by DR ROBERT LEFEVER.
Here are some interesting lines:
This entrepreneur is on strike. The interference by government has gone too far. I have every intention of working for another twenty years but I have no intention whatever of allowing myself to be controlled ever again by state-funded jobsworths.
With no employees, I am below their radar. I do not have to formulate policies and procedures and monitoring systems for them to inspect. I do not have to listen to the lectures and pontifications of people who have never created or run anything in their entire lives. I do not have to go on courses that have no value whatever to me but simply enable bureaucrats to tick their boxes. I'm free of all that.
Most of all, I value being free from the sense that I was contributing to political ideas that I do not support. Even in the fully private sector, my work supported the State. It was my taxes, and those of staff in jobs that I created, that kept the State in funds so that it could waste them on projects that I do not believe in.
Here are some interesting lines:
This entrepreneur is on strike. The interference by government has gone too far. I have every intention of working for another twenty years but I have no intention whatever of allowing myself to be controlled ever again by state-funded jobsworths.
With no employees, I am below their radar. I do not have to formulate policies and procedures and monitoring systems for them to inspect. I do not have to listen to the lectures and pontifications of people who have never created or run anything in their entire lives. I do not have to go on courses that have no value whatever to me but simply enable bureaucrats to tick their boxes. I'm free of all that.
Most of all, I value being free from the sense that I was contributing to political ideas that I do not support. Even in the fully private sector, my work supported the State. It was my taxes, and those of staff in jobs that I created, that kept the State in funds so that it could waste them on projects that I do not believe in.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
New Economic Reform in Freeworld
Peter realized that a sort of miracle had come about. His two inventions — first, freedom of exchange of consumers' goods, and second, private ownership of the means of production and free exchange of the means of production — had solved the problem of economic calculation! Or rather, they had given rise to a free market system, a free price system. And it was this that had solved the problem of economic calculation.
Click here to read this interesting philosophical tale at the Mises website...
Click here to read this interesting philosophical tale at the Mises website...
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Sunday, April 15, 2012
An irrelevant intervention: Tavleen Singh
With little surprise to any believer in free markets, the economic crisis in India continues. The government has run out of all ideas and instead of reforming the economy, the leaders are busy enacting new "rights," which will only have the effect of further increasing the size of the government and the inefficiency and corruption that comes with it.
In her article in today's edition of The Indian Express, Tavleen Singh has exposed the so-called "Right to Education" for what it really is - a bad law. Here is an interesting excerpt from Tavleen Singh's article:
"The Right to Education Act is a bad law. It was described by Lant Pritchett of Harvard’s Kennedy School as ‘massively ill-conceived’ in an interview to this newspaper and Professor Pritchett was not exaggerating. The singular achievement of this law will be to increase the powers of petty officials to meddle in the handful of private schools that offer, albeit at a price, a relatively high standard of education. What we need is not more official meddling but less, except in government schools in which a great deal more meddling is needed to ensure that abysmal standards improve. But, the clever little officials who man the bastions of government in our sadly illiterate land confine their attentions to private schools for reasons that should be obvious.
So the Indian school system is defined by two characteristics that are probably unique to it. Private schools are constantly under siege from inspectors of the most needless kind who can often only be satisfied if a hefty bribe comes their way. And, government schools are left to provide standards of education so appalling that most children leave school without being able to read a book. I know this from empirical research as I make it a point on my travels to visit as many schools as I can.
The truth is that even if every private school in this country was diligent about filling its 25 per cent quota for destitute children, it will make no difference. The only way to bring about revolutionary changes in Indian education is if government schools improve in a revolutionary way. There is nothing in the RTE that provides for this to happen which is why I agree with Professor Pritchett when he describes the new law as ‘massively ill-conceived’.
We do not need a new law for the Indian education system to improve. We do not even need quotas in private schools for economically deprived children although it can do no harm for middle-class children to discover how privileged they are. What we need desperately is for government schools to ensure that teachers really teach, that classrooms do not fall to ruin because of bad maintenance, that toilets and drinking water are made available and that the funds for midday meals do not get eaten up by corrupt officials and teachers. None of these things will happen under the new Right to Education Act. The truth is that if it were torn up and flung into the nearest garbage bin it would not be missed. It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court of India endorsed this irrelevant and ill-conceived new law instead of intervening in a more meaningful way."
In her article in today's edition of The Indian Express, Tavleen Singh has exposed the so-called "Right to Education" for what it really is - a bad law. Here is an interesting excerpt from Tavleen Singh's article:
"The Right to Education Act is a bad law. It was described by Lant Pritchett of Harvard’s Kennedy School as ‘massively ill-conceived’ in an interview to this newspaper and Professor Pritchett was not exaggerating. The singular achievement of this law will be to increase the powers of petty officials to meddle in the handful of private schools that offer, albeit at a price, a relatively high standard of education. What we need is not more official meddling but less, except in government schools in which a great deal more meddling is needed to ensure that abysmal standards improve. But, the clever little officials who man the bastions of government in our sadly illiterate land confine their attentions to private schools for reasons that should be obvious.
So the Indian school system is defined by two characteristics that are probably unique to it. Private schools are constantly under siege from inspectors of the most needless kind who can often only be satisfied if a hefty bribe comes their way. And, government schools are left to provide standards of education so appalling that most children leave school without being able to read a book. I know this from empirical research as I make it a point on my travels to visit as many schools as I can.
The truth is that even if every private school in this country was diligent about filling its 25 per cent quota for destitute children, it will make no difference. The only way to bring about revolutionary changes in Indian education is if government schools improve in a revolutionary way. There is nothing in the RTE that provides for this to happen which is why I agree with Professor Pritchett when he describes the new law as ‘massively ill-conceived’.
We do not need a new law for the Indian education system to improve. We do not even need quotas in private schools for economically deprived children although it can do no harm for middle-class children to discover how privileged they are. What we need desperately is for government schools to ensure that teachers really teach, that classrooms do not fall to ruin because of bad maintenance, that toilets and drinking water are made available and that the funds for midday meals do not get eaten up by corrupt officials and teachers. None of these things will happen under the new Right to Education Act. The truth is that if it were torn up and flung into the nearest garbage bin it would not be missed. It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court of India endorsed this irrelevant and ill-conceived new law instead of intervening in a more meaningful way."
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Right to Political Indoctrination
The Right to Education can also turn out to be the “Right to Political Indoctrination.” Instead of providing factual education to the young children, the political and cultural elite will try their best to indoctrinate the students. An even larger number of students will fall prey to leftist propaganda.
It is not as if all educated people are intelligent, “sane,” and productive citizens of society. The Indian education system often fills the mind of the students with false sense of entitlements; instead of becoming productive citizens, the students leave the educational institutes filled with the notion that it is society’s job to support them.
Our political and cultural elite, the so-called intellectuals, are so convinced of their moral superiority and pure intentions that they do not feel guilt or doubt about imposing their views on young students. If the Right to Education gets implemented in its entirety it would wreck Indian society and culture.
It is not as if all educated people are intelligent, “sane,” and productive citizens of society. The Indian education system often fills the mind of the students with false sense of entitlements; instead of becoming productive citizens, the students leave the educational institutes filled with the notion that it is society’s job to support them.
Our political and cultural elite, the so-called intellectuals, are so convinced of their moral superiority and pure intentions that they do not feel guilt or doubt about imposing their views on young students. If the Right to Education gets implemented in its entirety it would wreck Indian society and culture.
Friday, April 13, 2012
The La La Land Statist Plan to Ban Plastic AND Paper Bags
The call for a ban on bags demonstrates no understanding of basic economics and the cost benefit decisions made by consumers and retailers. Throwaway bags are used because they are convenient. And, if the free market were allowed to operate in the refuse disposal industry, there would be no externalities associated with the use of disposable bags.
Click Here...
Click Here...
Thursday, April 12, 2012
The Elite Too-Big-to-Fail Empires
One could argue that chaos is what the elites want – because out of chaos comes order ... a New World Order. But the elites, in our view, want chaos that is controlled on their terms.
These dynastic families and their enablers and associates apparently control central banking around the world and want to create global government. They use mercantilism – passing laws and regulations that aid their control – to ensure that events move in a certain direction. We've taken to calling this directed history.
The power elite has created the current financial system, in our view, and controls government and regulators as well. They do not want the current system to founder and fail.
But the current system is THEIR system, designed to maximize control and move the world toward global government. The too-big-to-fail approach is basically a dominant social theme.
The elites use these memes to frighten middle classes into giving up power and wealth to specially designed international facilities the elites control. But now they are taking it a step further. Having caused a rolling economic depression in the West, the elites now propound the theme that society as a whole must support its purposefully failing institutions.
The same toxic mix of regulators, central banks and financial firms that created the economic mess are now to conspire together to ensure that the worst of the failing institutions are to be propped up at any cost.
Click here to read more on The Daily Bell.
These dynastic families and their enablers and associates apparently control central banking around the world and want to create global government. They use mercantilism – passing laws and regulations that aid their control – to ensure that events move in a certain direction. We've taken to calling this directed history.
The power elite has created the current financial system, in our view, and controls government and regulators as well. They do not want the current system to founder and fail.
But the current system is THEIR system, designed to maximize control and move the world toward global government. The too-big-to-fail approach is basically a dominant social theme.
The elites use these memes to frighten middle classes into giving up power and wealth to specially designed international facilities the elites control. But now they are taking it a step further. Having caused a rolling economic depression in the West, the elites now propound the theme that society as a whole must support its purposefully failing institutions.
The same toxic mix of regulators, central banks and financial firms that created the economic mess are now to conspire together to ensure that the worst of the failing institutions are to be propped up at any cost.
Click here to read more on The Daily Bell.
Ron Paul: the Road to REVOLution Video Game kickstarter promo
This interesting video game starring Ron Paul is based on the closing down of government agencies and an understanding of Austrian economics and the business cycle
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
The Most Visited Libertarian Websites
The Capital Free Press has come up with a ranking of ranking of the top libertarian websites based on the number of unique visitors in the most recent month. As many as 114 websites have been featured. Of course, the Lew Rockwell blog is at the top of the list. No surprises there.
Click here to see the list of top libertarian sites.
Click here to see the list of top libertarian sites.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Monday, April 9, 2012
Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote
"Unlike Rome, the West’s intellectuals have defended the spread of the welfare state by means of a system of ethics. It rests on a variation of the Mosaic commandment against theft: “Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.” So widespread has this revised commandment been that the electorates in every Western nation will not tolerate its rejection. Yet the economics of the deficits points to the operational failure of the welfare system," says Gary North in article titled When Government Safety Nets Break.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Is democracy the God that failed?
Democracy – The God That Failed
This post at the God that Failed blog is worth reading: Democracy-The God That Failed
This post at the God that Failed blog is worth reading: Democracy-The God That Failed
The government is not above the rule of law
Gurcharan Das has written a wonderful article in today's Times of India. The title makes it crystalclear what the article is all about - The government is not above the rule of law.
He writes,"The rule of law is based on a moral consensus, expressed daily in the ‘habits of the heart’. People obey the law not only because they fear punishment but because they think it is fair and it becomes a habit and a form of self restraint. While Indian habits may not be quite as liberal as English habits, India always had a rule of law expressed as ‘dharma’, which gave coherence to people’s lives, reduced uncertainty and provided self-restraint. For this reason the founding fathers of our Constitution often invoked dharma in their speeches. The great PV Kane, who won the Bharat Ratna, called the Constitution a ‘dharma text’. In pre-modern times, dharma restrained the power of the state via raja-dharma — it was higher than the king whose duty was to uphold it. Some of the UPA’s ministers would do well to ponder this thought."
He writes,"The rule of law is based on a moral consensus, expressed daily in the ‘habits of the heart’. People obey the law not only because they fear punishment but because they think it is fair and it becomes a habit and a form of self restraint. While Indian habits may not be quite as liberal as English habits, India always had a rule of law expressed as ‘dharma’, which gave coherence to people’s lives, reduced uncertainty and provided self-restraint. For this reason the founding fathers of our Constitution often invoked dharma in their speeches. The great PV Kane, who won the Bharat Ratna, called the Constitution a ‘dharma text’. In pre-modern times, dharma restrained the power of the state via raja-dharma — it was higher than the king whose duty was to uphold it. Some of the UPA’s ministers would do well to ponder this thought."
Saturday, April 7, 2012
The Administration’s Press
Even the capitalist world can give rise to media outlets like the Soviet Unions infamous Pravda. Click here.
Friday, April 6, 2012
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
What Is In Your Self-Interest?
Capitalism Magazine has published a nice story by Jaana Woiceshyn. The moral of the story is: "Evading problems, not taking responsibility for your own actions, and taking the undeserved does not bode well for achieving your values—such as career success—in the long term."
Click here to read.
Click here to read.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Why Printing Money is Immoral
Where money is concerned, there are two fundamentally different concepts of "value", one rooted in subjectivism and one rooted in objectivism. In a monetary context, value subjectivism means that money has value simply because people believe that it does and that whatever people can be persuaded or coerced into using as money, such as a piece of paper bearing a government stamp, therefore has "value". In other words, value subjectivism is the view that the only "value" that exists resides in the minds of human beings as a concept or belief and that, therefore, "value" can be created ex nihilo by persuasion or coercion, i.e., by influencing or controlling (through coercion or fear of coercion) the minds of human beings. Value objectivism means that money has value because it contains the resources and labor required to produce it in the same way that clothing or shelter have value for the survival requirements of human life.
Click here...
Click here...
Sunday, April 1, 2012
The Real Meaning of Earth Hour
Politicians and environmentalists, including those behind Earth Hour, are not calling on people just to change a few light bulbs, they are calling for a truly massive reduction in carbon emissions–as much as 80 percent below 1990 levels. Because our energy is overwhelmingly carbon-based (fossil fuels provide more than 80 percent of world energy), and because the claims of abundant “green energy” from breezes and sunbeams are a myth–this necessarily means a massive reduction in our energy use.
People don’t have a clear view of what this would mean in practice. We, in the industrialized world, take our abundant energy for granted and don’t consider just how much we benefit from its use in every minute of every day. Driving our cars to work and school, sitting in our lighted, heated homes and offices, powering our computers and countless other labor-saving appliances, we count on the indispensable values that industrial energy makes possible: hospitals and grocery stores, factories and farms, international travel and global telecommunications. It is hard for us to project the degree of sacrifice and harm that proposed climate policies would force upon us.
This blindness to the vital importance of energy is precisely what Earth Hour exploits. It sends the comforting-but-false message: Cutting off fossil fuels would be easy and even fun! People spend the hour stargazing and holding torch-lit beach parties; restaurants offer special candle-lit dinners. Earth Hour makes the renunciation of energy seem like a big party.
Participants spend an enjoyable sixty minutes in the dark, safe in the knowledge that the life-saving benefits of industrial civilization are just a light switch away. This bears no relation whatsoever to what life would actually be like under the sort of draconian carbon-reduction policies that climate activists are demanding: punishing carbon taxes, severe emissions caps, outright bans on the construction of power plants.
Forget one measly hour with just the lights off. How about Earth Month, without any form of fossil fuel energy? Try spending a month shivering in the dark without heating, electricity, refrigeration; without power plants or generators; without any of the labor-saving, time-saving, and therefore life-saving products that industrial energy makes possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)