PA: "We did it"
Slide 6 in this series.
The celebration of the passing of the Paris Accord was obviously misplaced. It was perhaps a celebration of the fact that they had captured the temporary committment from the USA to bear the cost. Is the UN so anti-USA or just lost in their version of what good environmentalism is? To be happy to spend this level of money and hurt if not kill this number of people is an offense that should be at least heavily criticized or even prosecuted.
What end is there or limit on cost. The AGW group is convinced they are doing the right thing despite having no data or logic behind spending this level of money, hurting a large number of people, and attenuating the economies of the world. Why isn't this level of destruction seen for exactly what it is?
This concludes the presentation. Do add your comments below and you can now browse our site for topics that need more details. Thanks for your attention.
We should revisit occasionally what the proper role of government is. As the constitution was a good sense of direction, we need a core set of principles to add in order to deal with the future.
So many want to engineer society, remove risk, assist certain groups, rather than let individuals thrive and raise communities. Why?
Is Democracy where we all "get it good and hard" or is it the best means to a free society?
Should we roll with the special interests, or make the government achieve its proper role, what is that role, and how to do this?
When do deficits and governments become too large?
Government is becoming more elitist while trying to sell corrections to problems it created, what makes this possible?
