March, 2016, Bonus Post, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

• Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
• Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
• Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page. The first post on global warming doubting for this month can be accessed at:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2016/03/march-2016-part-1-i-am-global-warming.html

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims:

1) One of the concerns of people that are global warming doubters and believers in science is that some scientists see the whole global warming/climate change issue as a money making, grant getting opportunity. And when this happens, as we have examined in past posts under this theme, the science takes a back seat to getting additional industry and government grants since if global warming was indeed proven to be a myth, there would no longer be any grant money to be found.

According to a March 23, 2016 article by Kevin Mooney, writing for the Heritage Foundation, that may have been the case relative to a George Mason University professor:

• According to the article, the National Science Foundation (NSF) is “seriously” interested in reviewing how millions and millions of taxpayer dollars were spent after they had been awarded to that George Mason University professor. 
• The NSF inspector general is possibly going to examine how professor Jagadish Shukla spent all of those millions.
• This is the same professor who signed a letter with nineteen other other global warming advocates who wanted the President to arrest and prosecute anyone who had a different opinion than them relative to global warming/climate change, you know, rip up the First Amendment rights of innocent Americans.
• One reason for the the potential abuse of taxpayer funds comes from the article’s assertion that: “The federal government is awash in guidelines governing the conduct of recipients of the billions of dollars in grants doled out by Washington every year. But these regulations are loosely enforced, both by government bureaucrats and by the institutions receiving the money.”
• An audit by George Mason University seems to imply that the professor misused tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, not millions, tens of millions of dollars, by “double dipping” in Federal and state funds in violation of university guidelines and rules.
• Professor Shukla is not only a university professor but he also operates the Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES), a relationship that a Congressional committee has also been investigating.
• Part of the obscenity of the whole deal is that it is possible that Shulka paid himself and his wife a total of $5.6 million in taxpayer funding in connection with his research, an obscene amount no matter how you cut it, using the IGES as a cover story.
• Besides being obscene, it probably violated the conditions of the NSA funding which sets limits on the amount of taxpayer money that can be used for salaries.
• A representative of the the National Center for Public Policy Research stated the obvious in the article: “The longstanding cozy relationship between grant-makers and grantees makes them blind to even the most obvious conflict of interest or incidence of double dipping. And when the government is driving the scientific research to reach a predetermined conclusion, as is the case with climate change, then no one is going to rock the boat…..the system is thoroughly corrupt." 

There you have it from at least one research source. Some, a few, who knows how many are using the global warming story to abort and contort real science to get an answer that they want and that their political benefactors want. Those are the ones abusing science, not global warming doubters who still believe in the purity of science and research.

2) Rick Moran writing for the American Thinker website, described how former Democratic candidate for President, Martin O'Malley, had this great theory, based on nothing, that it was global warming who created the terror group ISIS. Not maybe created it, not maybe created it with other factors involved - like thousands of years of war and animosity between different versions of Islam - or the brutal dictatorship of the Assad family, nope global warming did it all by itself.

Global warming and only global warming created ISIS: "One of the things that preceded the failure of the nation-state of Syria and the rise of ISIS was the effect of climate change and the mega-drought that affected that region, wiped out farmers, drove people to cities, created a humanitarian crisis that created the symptoms — or rather the conditions of extreme poverty — that has now led to the rise of ISIL and this extreme violence.” 

I guess the Middle East has NEVER had a drought before. If it had, ISIS would have formed centuries ago. His statement is based on no research, no scientific findings, just political hogwash. Consider what real scientists have to say about this nonsense: “It is not until you dig pretty deep into the technical scientific literature, that you find out that the anthropogenic climate change impact on drought conditions in the Fertile Crescent is extremely minimal and tenuous—so much so that it is debatable as to whether it is detectable at all,” according to Chip Knappenberger and Patrick Michaels, climate scientists at the libertarian Cato Institute.

It gets so tiring when politicians like O’Malley, Gore, Obama, and others use and abuse science, data, and reality for their own political gains. 

3) Michael Bastasch, writing for the Daily Caller website in early February, described some more real science when it comes to reducing the carbon footprint of the U.S.:

• The Business Council for Sustainable Energy (BCSE) and Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) recently published their annual energy factbook.
• Their major finding was that inexpensive natural gas, as a resulting of fracking, has been a major driver in reducing overall U.S. carbon emissions over the recent past: “Unprecedented levels of natural gas supply pushed down power prices, putting the country in a more internationally competitive position while also prompting coal-to-gas switching that slashed US carbon emissions,” the group’s report reads.
• Furthermore, “U.S. power sector CO2 emissions fell to their lowest annual level since the mid-1990s,” according to the report.
• The report went on to state that they found while green energy sources and improving energy efficiency performance helps, those efforts were near non-existent relative to what natural gas has done to reduce the nation’s carbon footprint.
• This latest study is in agreement with a similar study done by the Manhattan Institute done in 2015 which also concluded that fracking caused the lion’s share of carbon emissions reductions since 2008.
• The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also conceded that fracking was a primary reason for falling emissions as opposed to green energy policies.

The key point here is that science has created an energy source that is less expensive, less dirty, less carbon heavy, and supports the goal of global warming advocates. Everyone is happy when science is used as it should be like it was in this fracking experience.

That will do it for this quick update to the them, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.”

Science being abused by politicians and those with serious financial stakes in misusing science to prove a preconceived theory, and science being used (fracking) to make life wonderful. When will we have have an adult, mature conversation in this country when ALL of the science is included in the conversation and not just the science that aligns with politicians’ political aims and corruption?

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

What Economic Experts Suggest For Digging Us Out Of Our Economic Hole

On Wednesday of this week we put forth a series of short term actions and steps that are needed to start turning turning around the very bad economic conditions that are plaguing our economy. Yesterday, we went through a series of long term steps that also need to be taken to make economic growth and prosperity a long term certainty in our economy. All of these steps are common sense, logical, simple approaches that somehow escape the grasp and understanding of our current set of politicians.

But we do not have a monopoly on how to fix what ails the country. Consider the following expert opinions from people more experienced than me in the world of economy, finance, and the Federal government. These expert opinions were listed out in the November, 2011 issue of Reason magazine and are summarized below. I have not given the full reasoning behind their opinions but hopefully I have provided enough detail to justify and explain their rationale.

As you go through these experts' opinions, take note how many of them line up with the common sense, simple, and logical ideas we presented versus the tired, ineffective, and useless ideas the Obama administration and the rest of the political class have implemented to no avail:

• John Stossel, Fox Business Network - Close the Federal Departments of Labor, Commerce, Agriculture, Energy, and HUD to cut government spending. Terminate 75% of all Federal regulations.
• Robert Higgins, author and senior fellow at the Independent Institute - Repeal Obama Care since it is so large, unwieldy and confusing it is introducing confusion and uncertainty (his word, not mine) into the minds of business owners, increasing the risk of them hiring permanent workers. As a result, they cut back on hiring, especially permanent workers who made add a substantial cost increase to their operations under Obama Care.
• Peter Schiff, author and CEO of Euro Pacific Capital - substantially reduce government rules that oversee and regulate wages, benefits, and all other issues related to employment. In other words, make it easier, less bureaucratic, less dangerous, and less risky for businesses to hire employees to fulfill their business needs.
• Ira Stoll, author and the editor and founder of http://www.futureofcapitalism.com/ - Restructure unemployment insurance so it creates an incentive for recipients to get a job rather than an incentive for them to remain unemployed. This suggestion is consistent with one of the tenets of the United States of Purple as laid out in the following post:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/united-states-of-purple-fixng-our.html

• Jeffrey Miron, Director of  undergraduate studies and professor of economics at Harvard University - The political class should focus on getting rid of economic policies that impede economic efficiency such as runaway debt and entitlements, over regulation, an ineffective tax code, and impediments to free trade, i.e. get out of the way and let the free market economy heal itself.
• Bryan Caplan, professor of economics at George Mason University - cut EMPLOYERS share of the payroll tax.
• John Berlau, director of the Center For Investors and Entrepreneurs at the Competitive Enterprise Institute - repeal financial regulations include parts of the Sarbannes-Oxley Act, parts of the Dodd-Frank Act, which Mr. Berlau feels "has created hundreds of pending rules causing uncertainty (his word, not mine) and a halt in hiring from banks and credit unions to retailers," and pass the Small Business Lending Enhancement Act which would raise the cap on business lending done by credit unions, freeing up more capital for small business growth opportunities. 
• Dan Mitchell, senior fellow at the Cato Institute - shrink the size of our bloated government and replace our current tax system with simple and fair flat tax which would eliminate tax loopholes and provide incentives to work, save, and invest while terminating the need to play games with wealth and resources which reduce the efficiency of a free market.
• Allan Meltzer, professor of economics at the Carnegie Mellon University Tepper School of Business - He has a four prong approach to fixing the economy which includes reducing the amount of uncertainty in the market by freezing the creation of all new Federal regulations for five years (with an exception for national defense exceptions), reduce government spending to get debt under control, reduce the corporate tax rate and pay for the reduction by simplifying the tax code and reducing loopholes, and work hard to keep inflation under control.
• Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University - simply the entire tax system by replacing the whole system with a consumption tax and and in the absence of this overhaul, amend the Constitution so that all types of incomes taxes are capped at 20%.
• Fred Smith, president of the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Build the Keystone pipeline to 1) generate tens of thousands of long term and short term jobs and 2) increase the amount of oil we import from friendly nations while reducing the amount of oil we import from unfriendly nations.
• Deirdre McCloskey, professor of economics at the University of Illinois in Chicago - Eliminate the minimum wage regulation for anyone under the age of 25 years old as a short term solution to the jobs problem and eliminate government intervention in the employee/employer relationship, e.g. eventually eliminate the minimum wage for everyone and let the market set the "price" for labor.
• Mitchell Munger, director of the philosophy, politics, and economics program at Duke University - Dump Obama Care since "the fiasco of the health care reform in 2008 made this problem (job creation) worse, not better. The new law created a complex, expensive system with no cost controls. And since insurance cannot cost less than the care it provides, this implicit but very real tax on job creation is hamstringing the recovery."
• John Berlau, director of the Center For Investors and Entrepreneurs at the Competitive Enterprise Institute - Repeal many of the regulations put forth by Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank to reduce the business uncertainty from the hundreds of defined and still to be defined regulations from both laws which are restricting hiring and business expansion. Pass the Small Business Lending Enhancement Act to lift the arbitrary cap on lending imposed on credit unions for small business loans.
• Alex Tabarrok, professor of economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University - Implement Quantitative Easing 3 (QE3).
• Bruce Bartlett, former Presidential advisor and U.S. Treasury official - Stimulate consumer and market demand by increasing government spending.

With the exception of the last two experts, all of the other experts have the same types of opinions and recommendations that we have been already talking about. We have to reduce the amount of uncertainty that exists in the marketplace, uncertainty that has been greatly increased by ill fated and stupid actions of the political class.

Removing uncertainty will provide all businesses, both large and small, with a clearer, more stable and less risky view of the future which will go a long way to getting business expansion and consumer demand underway. Reducing regulations, reducing government spending, simplifying the tax code, cleaning up government spending waste, keeping taxes low, and getting government and the politicians that operate it out of the way is the only way to get the economy rolling again.

Regarding the last two opinions, we have already tried these two approaches and the have failed miserably. With regards to Mr. Bartlett's suggestion, the Obama administration's budget this year is almost $4,000,000,000,000. It has been close to that for three years. Given the atrocious amount it spends already, with a very large percentage of it being pure waste, I doubt if it spent anymore we would solve our economic problems.

The original $813,000,000,000 government spending stimulus did no good, spending more is unlikely to do anything positive either. With the government already spending almost $4,000,000,000,000 and the nation's GDP about $15,000,000,000,000, there is not enough money laying around that Washington could spend that would make any real difference.

With regards to the suggestion of implementing QE3, since QE1 and QE2 did nothing long term for the economy, except insert over $2,000,000,000,000 of fake money into the financial system, fake money that will eventually cause a pretty good shot of inflation, why would we do QE3? Remember the words of Einstein: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." QE3 would be the same insanity of the failed QE1 and QE2 efforts.

Also, consider the conversation between the two experts in the following video as they discuss the folly of quantitative easing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k

They do not see quantitative easing being the answer either.

The politicians and the Obama administration have had their chance to fix what ails the economy. Their tired ideas have resulted in persistently high unemployment, wasteful government spending, skyrocketing national debt, sovereign debt credit downgrade, and a work force that is becoming very discouraged. Their failed concepts need to be put to permanent rest.

We need to clear the decks and get rid of excessive government regulation, excessive government interference, escessive and complex taxation, excessive government bureaucracy, and let the market and the economy start healing itself. Recent attempts to do that by the political class has been nothing more than voodoo economic theory by voodoo doctors in Washington.





We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of our times.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at www.loathemygovernment.com. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.
Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment