Outrage Is a Mild Word

| October 11, 2018

1967 Blizzard

The link below is to the first to two articles regarding a demand by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that a carbon tax be inflicted on the public at large so that they can milk that revenue for $122 trillion. This will be at YOUR expense and mine. The figures are in US dollars, not foreign currency. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/10/ipcc-demands-122-trillion-to-fight-the-global-war-on-weather/#comment-2486959

I calculated my one-month winter use of natural gas for heating the house, cooking and providing hot water, using a base usage from my monthly bills, of 155 therms in January.  One therm of energy is 96.7 cubic feet. That means that in winter, I use 14,998.5 cf or 14.9885 BTUs.

According to the per Mcf tax indicated of $1,434.00 per Mcf  (1,000 cubic feet), my gas bill for January alone would run to $21,493.51. You can look at your own gas bill, or your electric bill, which would also be taxed, and do the math yourself.

For those of you who use a vehicle to commute and run errands, if regular gas at the pump is $2.70, including taxes, the IPCC’s tax would add $249.00./gallon to the total.

I do not have that kind of income. I do not know of anyone who does, except maybe that grandstanding fraud Gore, who wants us to vote for a penguin for Congress.

There is a “bye” in the proposal that says the consumer would be on the receiving end of a rebate, but the “rebate” comes to about $2,000 per year. This will hardly cover any kind of cost to me or you or displace even a freaking cent of the staggering cost of that monthly charge to my gas bill. And that is only my gas bill.

Electricity to run the furnace, start the water heater and the stove cooktop, and light my home and run my computer isn’t included in that calculation just yet.

This link will take you to the second article, in which the author more clearly and completely provides the math for the carbon tax and the results. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/11/ipcc-sr1-5-carbon-tax-math/

While the IPCC’s goal line is from 2030 to 2100, it doesn’t matter if it starts tomorrow or by the beginning of the 2100. It is a fraud, and nothing else, and no one should be expected to contribute to this fraud.

I am more and more convinced that the United Nations is the most useless bunch of self-serving jerks on the planet, a group that does nothing but come up to you, the taxpayer, with its hands out for more of your income to spend on itself, and that the IPCC is a bunch of greedy, money-guzzling goons fronting the biggest fraud ever invented. I think that both of them, and especially the IPCC, should be defunded and dismissed and sent packing.

They can go pound sand up their backsides.

Category: "Teh Stoopid", "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves", "Your Tax Dollars At Work"

Comments (35)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. AW1Ed says:

    As if another reason was required to keep the Dems in the minority and out of our wallets. Thanks for posting, Ex.

  2. Sounds like a fine for using gas/electric utilities so the panel can use the moola shmoola for themselves like lavish resort conventions vacations etc.

  3. Mason says:

    The IPCC can go f themselves.

    The left can’t legislate their agenda so they go to the courts. When the courts fail them, they go to the globalists and agree to some asinine treaty.

  4. @Ex-PH2

    Its just Socialists / Marxists pushing for ‘wealth redistribution’.

    The end goal of this scam is killing off ‘capitalism’.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Yeah, but if you kill off capitalism, you kill off the money, too.

      I guess they just don’t understand that basic idea: it ain’t free money.

  5. Skyjumper says:

    Up here in Cheeseland where I live, 48 degrees out with a blowing wind, sun shining, heat not turned on yet, homemade bean & ham soup cooking on the stove, wearing jeans & a warm sweatshirt and the temp in the house is a comfortable 65 degrees.

    They can go pound sand!

  6. MrFace says:

    Kind of reminds me of the Agenda 21 thing at the U.N.

    Although I am not into conspiracy theories; maybe their is a grain of truth in the tinfoils.


  7. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    It’s another wealth redistribution scheme cooked up by jerkoff socialists pretending to give a shit about the planet and its people…always funny how their plans involve bilking one group to make themselves rich….

    One thing about socialism always remains true, they have ideas that so fucking good they have to be mandatory in order for everyone not amongst the ruling elite to share the misery.

  8. OldSoldier54 says:

    UN = Useless Narcissists.

  9. Bill M says:

    If we were to do the wise thing and cut off the funds we provide, the UN would dry up and blow away.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Trump proposed ending payments to the UN’s IPCC in 2017, and The White House budget request in February 2018 completely eliminated an account known as “International Organizations and Programs.” This is the vehicle through which the United States makes contributions to a number of health, development and humanitarian entities, including the UN Environment Program, UN Women and the UN Development Program.

      So he’s cutting off funding for programs we’ve paid into at a higher rate than anyone else, and he indicated the environmental section IPCC should get nothing at all.

      That was in February. I don’t know how that went.

  10. SGT Ted says:

    It’s not a tax. It’s an attempted wealth transfer to the kleptocracies that run the UN.

    Even the UN has pretty much openly admitted that they want to use Climate alarmism to loot the west.

  11. Slow Joe says:

    I am doing my instructor time as a SGL at the NCO Academy, and I have many international students. They all have one thing in common: they all believe in climate change.

    It is not just that they believe it, but that they have never, ever, considered the possibility that is fake and it is a fraud. They have not ever been exposed to the arguments against climate change.

    My experience as an instructor have reinforced my opinion that the US is the ONLY free place in the world. It is sad. We have to protect what we have.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Show them the figures I came up with and tell them that the consequence of this fraud will come out of their pockets, because the IPCC wants to foist that crap on everyone.

    • J.R. Johnson says:

      Slow Joe,
      You are coming at it a little sideways. Climate Change is a real phenomena. The planet has cycles that last a few thousand years: It warms up, it cools off and then repeats. Some go to larger extremes such as the Ice Age. What is not proven or completely fabricated, is that Humans have any effect on it.
      About the only thing that can be proven is that clearing of the rain forest kills off thousands of undiscovered species that could be helpful to humans (and huge boons for the pharmaceutical companies), and reduces the earth’s natural ability to clear the air by removing carbon dioxide and producing oxygen. So making skyscrapers with plants in them that recycle water, lower temperatures, and produce oxygen do make sense, especially in the desert.
      Most of their other malarkey does not, especially when you don’t include China the current biggest offender. Investing in Solar cells to become more efficient, makes sense. Investing in more efficient battery technology, makes sense. Making out of Lithium, does not since most of it is in China, and has to be strip mined to get to it. Investing in alternative natural power sources makes sense. Building giant wind turbines out of 260tons of steal, seems to be counterproductive if you are trying to reduce carbon production, unless they last for 150years (20-25 years is the life expectancy currently). Having every house with photo electric Solar panels on it to supplement the power grid, makes sense in the south, and especially the West, but not so much Alaska and many northern states (US). Having solar heating panels that circulate ambient heat in winter, and provide hot water, makes much more sense. Geothermal makes even more sense. Having regulations to ensure products have a life expectancy of greater than five years, and greater than 10 for appliances would reduce carbon production more than putting baffles on a smoke stack…of course that will also raise prices.

      • Ex-PH2 says:

        You missed a few boats there, J.R.

        1 – Climate change was going LOOOONG before humans existed. WE have little or NOTHING to do with it. It’s a natural cycle and while we have been in an 18,000 year interglacial period, it may be slowly ending.
        2 – Carbon dioxide doesn’t just come from human activity. It also comes out of volcanoes, along with some other REALLY noxious gases, and other life forms such as insects and nonhuman animal species ALSO emit CO2. It’s a biological and geophysical activity.
        3 – CO2 is what plants absorb to create A) sugar/carbohydrates/sap – whatever you want to call it, and B) plants release high quantities of water vapor and oxygen, keeping the current geochemistry balanced.

        6 – Yes, I know the numbers are off, but not NEARLY as off as the fraudulent results reported by IPCC, as well as the altered data produced under Gavin Scmidt’s direction a NASA, and before him, James Hansen, who was notorious for doing that.

        B – Michael Mann’s infamous hockey stick chart was baloney. He admitted to it a while back. But being the greedy, grant money-sucking, egocentric jerk that he is, his current notoriety is something he thrives on, so he gets more money as a result. And because Penn State gets half of his grant money, which is usually $3++ million per grant, they don’t give a damn what he says or does.

        12 – WE’re in both a dormatn solar cyclem, aka solar minimum, now and the planet’s magnetic poles are weakening and shifting, which leaves the planet open to more deep space radiation, which is now shown to be connected to increased precipitation.

        And all of those things I brought up are things over which we have no control, including what plants do, unless we wipe them out.

      • MSG Eric says:

        It’s not that people are arguing that the climate doesn’t change. It’s the problematic extremism that people proclaim humans are 100% the reason why the climate is changing.

        When it is warmer in a day than previously “OMG, Climate change proof!” when it is colder in a day than previously, “OMG! Climate change proof!”

        Al Gore was saying in the 90s that Manhattan would be underwater by now. The earth’s ocean levels have increased by a couple inches? The earth’s ocean levels have increased continuously over the years. Why? Because we’re out of the significant ice age we had thousands of years ago and the ice continues to melt. They’ve found proof of this due to finding more than one “city” underwater in various places around the world.

        So, were those cities plunged into the ocean because of driving SUVs and turning the Air Conditioning too high? Because they weren’t spewing money into bullshit green energy companies using it as an excuse to be capitalists?

        We don’t know because the “predictive models” aren’t the truth. Predictive models state “this is a possibility of what could happen” not this WILL happen. They can be wrong. They also require parameters and facts to be input by human beings. Human beings who get grants based on what someone wants them to find out.

        It’s like the dumbasses who think “OMG, the Mayans said the world is ending this year at this time!” And keep being wrong. “Oh this prophecy said the earth would end….give me money so I can study it. Quickly, before it’s too late!” “Oh, so it didn’t happen this time. But it’s coming again in 10 years. Hurry up, start giving me money now so I can do my best to help us prepare for that!”

  12. MSG Eric says:

    Since China, India, and South East Asia are the biggest contributors to pollution in the world, they should pay 95% of this “tax” for the rest of the world.

    Our Water, Air, and Soil have all gotten considerably cleaner since the 70s and continues to get cleaner. We shouldn’t need to be taxed because we’re doing the right thing.

  13. HMC Ret says:

    Yeah, let them send the goon squad to collect their ‘tax’; more like a shakedown. This type of information should be made available to the public by the RINOs so the public can make an informed decision. If they are happy voting for an alarmist fraud, so be it. Trump should completely, 100% get us the hell out of the UN. I would not give those bastards another dime until they fell in line and did things ‘my’ way. Kids get indoctrinated in grade school about the evils of the RINOs and how the democrats are going to save the world. Bullshit.

  14. Roh-Dog says:

    They’ll have to pry my 6.2L V8 F-350 that gets about 11 MPG out of my cold, dead hands.
    And I dare them.

  15. NHSparky says:

    So how much of the bill does China have to pony up?

    Asking for a friend.

  16. RetiredDevilDoc8404 says:

    I’d be all for getting out of the UN except for one thing, with a veto on the security council we can nix anything that part of the body tries to foist on the world. That being said, I’m all for kicking them the F- out of the US; send them elsewhere, I’d suggest Geneva, but what have the Swiss done to us recently, perhaps Pyongyang or a nice spot somewhere in the Gobi Desert would be nice for the new UN headquarters, none of those annoying traffic laws. I figure it would disband within six months of the move – if that.

    • RGR 4-78 says:

      I still think Pitcairn Island would be a great place to house the U.N.

      • Ex-PH2 says:

        How about South Georgia Island, near Antarctica instead?

        South Georgia, mountainous barren island in the South Atlantic Ocean, 800 miles (1,300 km) east-southeast of the Falkland Islands.

        They do get some kind of warmish weather in the summer.

    • MSG Eric says:

      Without the obscene amount of money we give the UN, they wouldn’t be able to do shit. Let alone, even IF they did proclaim something that the US was required to do, we’d just say, “Fuck off.” and they wouldn’t do anything about it.

      They can’t even get tiny countries like Syria, Iran, Iraq, Cuba, North Korea, etc., to do what they want. How would they force us to do anything?

      They’d definitely close up shop if we weren’t paying the bills.

  17. Docduracoat says:

    Get the U.S. out of the U.N.
    Get the U.N. out of the U.S.!