Despite my spidey sense tingling like crazy and that little voice in my head saying, “Leave this one alone” my curiosity and a genuine heartfelt desire to educate myself on a topic I feel limited in, I’m going to throw out another climate change post, but from the position that I would like input from those so called experts for my on benefit.
First a disclaimer, I have no science background and 8 times out of 10 whenever the subject is brought up, it comes from a position of certitude so off putting (the science is settled so get with the program) or it is espoused by those so radical/tyrannical (anyone that denies climate change should be jailed) that my immediate reaction is to change the channel. I admit I must resist the urge to tune out, thus this post.
There is a group of Republicans that formed to address the seriousness of climate change, The Climate Leadership Council. Here is their mission statement;
Mounting evidence of climate change is growing too
strong to ignore. While the extent to which climate change
is due to man-made causes can be questioned, the risks
associated with future warming are too big and should be
hedged. At least we need an insurance policy. For too long,
many Republicans have looked the other way, forfeiting
the policy initiative to those who favor growth-inhibiting
command-and-control regulations, and fostering a needless
climate divide between the GOP and the scientific, business,
military, religious, civic and international mainstream.
Now that the Republican Party controls the White House and
Congress, it has the opportunity and responsibility to promote
a climate plan that showcases the full power of enduring
conservative convictions. Any climate solution should be based
on sound economic analysis and embody the principles of free
markets and limited government. As this paper argues, such
a plan could strengthen our economy, benefit working-class
Americans, reduce regulations, protect our natural heritage and
consolidate a new era of Republican leadership. These benefits
accrue regardless of one’s views on climate science
What clued me on to these guys was a WSJ article I read this morning. It is a short piece, easily readable.
I would appreciate Stogy, CM, Hal, and Alex to comment on it from a position of;
Does this make sense to you?
Does it go far enough?
Do you think they have a proper handle of the situation?
Can capitalism/free trade exist in a world where climate change is seriously addressed?
Any other readers who feel compelled to comment is also appreciated.
Naturally I think any “carbon taxes/carbon dividend” steps can only be addressed after real meaningful tax reform, lowering the corporate tax rate and providing tax incentives to facilitate bringing back home the trillions out there overseas.
OK, let me have it.