As Governor of a Peninsula that has been a target of severe hurricane threats, what is DeSantis's position on Climate Change? Has DeSantis proposed raising the income tax in Florida, to pay for the recent damages of Hurricane Ian and create a fund to cover future hurricane destruction and sea level rise? Or is he relying mainly on the F…
As Governor of a Peninsula that has been a target of severe hurricane threats, what is DeSantis's position on Climate Change? Has DeSantis proposed raising the income tax in Florida, to pay for the recent damages of Hurricane Ian and create a fund to cover future hurricane destruction and sea level rise? Or is he relying mainly on the Federal Government to bail Floridians out? I've heard Ian's damage estimates are ranging as high as 258 Billion! How do DeSantis's Climate Change remediation efforts stack up against the the ever increasing environmental threats the State faces? Given the upheaval and destruction of Ian, it seems like he has no responsible choice but to raise the tax base significantly. Something that should have happened four years ago, just to deal with the other environmental problems Florida is facing, in the Everglades, Biodiversity, Invasive species, fungus endangering some non-native palms, drinking water from pollution and waste:
Will DeSantis become a responsible Governor and raise taxes sufficiently to do what is necessary to protect Floridians, or will he just hope for the best and keep listening to his major sponsor, Charles Koch, and forget about the future of Florida? Glaciers are melting in the north and the waters around the Peninsula are getting warmer. No one can say he wasn't warned, but I guess it's a lot cheaper and easier to go after Disney, get CRT out of kindergarten, grade school, and high school where it doesn't even exist, and ban and burn some books. Yale should really be ashamed graduating such an irresponsible, juvenile delinquent, and con man.
What DeSantis policy on Climate Change are you referring to? It doesn't appear he is close to being up to the task. He's been in office for four years and has invested nearly nothing on remediation compared to the immense costs incurred by climate change. Moreover he's relied and mooched off the Fed Government.
No one has any business building on the coast unless they can afford to rebuild or are insured. If you can afford to build there you can afford private insurance or self insurance. No more bailouts. That is not the purpose of government.
As for Climate Change, a mere 20,000 years ago the sea level was 120 meters lower than today. The next glaciation is expected within 10,000 years. Glaciations tend to last 200,000 years, and are more common than warm periods like today, so try to enjoy the best of times.
Somehow , "...a mere 20,000 years ago sea level was 120 meters lower than it is today" isn't that comforting when the scientific consensus is significant sea level rise will occur before 2050:
As you are aware the theory of climate change is generally based on the assumption and verification that our burning of green house gases is causing the earth to warm. Climate scientists came to this conclusion late in the 19th century. Exxon scientists confirmed this theory as early as 1980, according to their internal documents.
Also, Ian penetrated and caused damage 20 miles inland where a lot of not so rich people reside. It's not that hard to envision how much worse life can get on a Peninsula if remediation measures aren't funded and addressed. It is exactly one of the primary functions of government to inform and protect it's citizens. Millions of people living in Florida, along with all of its other environmental issues, will be impacted.
We need to start evaluating our leaders based on how they handle their State and Nation's deferred maintenance, especially when tax revenues are insufficient to adequately address our critical challenges, and not addressing a problem is prohibitively more expensive and impossible to remedy. Many of our problems are National and Global in scope, which requires our leaders to intelligent, informed, diplomatic, and persistent in working cooperatively to find solutions.
"The sea level around Florida is up to 8 inches higher than it was in 1950.1 | 2 This increase is mostly due to ice melting into the ocean and, complicated by the porous limestone that the state sits on, it’s causing major issues."
Can you guess why the soil in Southern Florida is limestone?
Sea level has not risen 8 inches since 1950. This is wrong.
Take a look at the graph in the linked article. Also note that even though we are burning much more fossil fuel than we were in the 1800's, the rate of sea level rise has remained constant. It's just a continuation of the natural rise that began 20,000 years ago.
One of the first things you should understand about the consequences of climate change is they aren't distributed uniformly. The article I referred you to was focused on Florida. Had you known anything about climate science you would have understood this. Reread the article I sent to you:
Also, please comment on the inadequate amount of money DeSantis has committed to mitigate the climate crisis in relation to the astronomical costs Florida is incurring. Also note how lucky Florida has been is dodging other hurricanes like Dorian that zigged east instead of west.
For your reference: https://www.axios.com/2022/10/07/hurricane-ian-damage-estimate-costliest-storm-florida. This estimate is preliminary and not comprehensive. Most estimates are based on insured losses or only limited to property damage. The range of estimates are as high as 258 Billion and may be even higher. For a better understanding refer to the following:
DeSantis' focus has been on trying to adapt Florida to climate change, what he calls “resilience,” and under his leadership, the state is starting to spend at least $1 billion to gird against impacts from future extreme weather through a new Resilient Florida program established by legislation he signed in May of 2021.Oct 13, 2022
His governance is ideologically irresponsible and juvenile. It's really hard to escape the consequences of fraud against the people of State of Florida. He needs to raise the State income revenue by 40-50% with the new revenue dedicated to CC mitigation. Instead of banning books, he needs to radically change the building codes and requirements, and alert his constituents about the New Normal and what must be done to prevent a knockout!
You should also understand that the consequences of climate change are not limited to Florida and coastal properties:
"Unfortunately, slightly higher sea levels make hurricanes even more damaging. Just a few more inches of sea level rise allow a hurricane to push more water onto the land, even if the hurricane itself doesn’t make landfall."
I did read the article, and I am well aware of that factor. It's a BS argument. In New Orleans they build as much as 8 feet below sea level. It's encouraged by Government backed loans, flood insurance and FEMA rebuilding. All at our expense. This is not the purpose of Government at all. Our tax money would be better spent simply educating people in geology so that they know better what to expect.
Beach houses today are McMansions, so sure the cost of rebuilding is more. Back in my day, coastal structures were always shacks which could be easily rebuilt after a storm. The cost was minimal.
You are also forgetting that sea levels have been rising for 20,000 years (120 meters). Folks building in coastal areas should be aware of this ongoing trend. Again, Florida soil is composed of decayed sea life deposited when it was under water.
The reason hurricanes are more damaging today is because there are more expensive homes in coastal regions. Government insurance encourages it.
You do understand we are in a worsening period of both sea level rise and warmer water that after a certain point is irreversible and more destructive..
The soil in south Florida is composed of limestone. The shells of ancient sea life. You see, Florida has been submerged beneath the ocean many times before. The sea levels rise and fall naturally. Natural variability cannot be simply ignored, unless you are unfamiliar with geologic history.
Attributing climate change to human activity is the definition of hubris.
"It is exactly one of the functions of government to inform and protect it's citizens."
Do you think it is government's job to protect citizens from hurricanes? Isn't it more the citizens responsibility to get out of the way when one approaches. Government does fund our early warning mechanisms to warn citizens, and they are very good at predicting the path a few days in advance. Government has also been very good at building evacuation routes to assist in evacuation. Beyond those basic functions, Government cannot stop hurricanes from happening.
The reason we have too much government today is that people ask too much of government. Government did not stop a pandemic, nor can they stop nature from fires, floods and crop failures. It is up to the citizens to protect themselves, as it should be. Those who are irresponsible suffer the consequences.
Government has actually been counterproductive in some cases. Providing subsidized insurance in flood prone areas attracts people to those areas. It mainly attracts people who can least afford such tragedy. It should never be used to insure a mansion on the beach for a rich person. He should pay for normal private insurance or pay to rebuild out of his own pocket. The whole program is immensely wasteful. It invites tragedy to those who can least afford it.
What happened to the Democrat of my day, like JFK? What became of "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Today this sounds like a Republican motto. Democrats just keep asking for more and more from their country.
Please point me in the direction of a Republican today who incorporates one trait of JFK. At least Nixon knew about foreign policy and could discuss various topics. Trump, a Republican, dealt Russia a royal flush on foreign policy and is largely responsible for Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
I do agree with you that the ultra wealthy and corporations should pay their own way and not receive government welfare, particularly when they are exempted from what use to be a progressive income system - the same one that financed and won two world wars, rebuilt Germany and Japan, and supported a rising middle-class, a higher educational system with affordable fees, and invested in our infrastructure while paying off our debt. We could be a better empire and have a better world if only we would reinstall a progressive income tax system without loopholes. No one likes paying taxes, but taxes are the price we pay for civilization, being a global leader, and having a more cohesive democracy.
One last thing. More productivity, such as oil exporting, generates more tax revenue without raising tax rates. Raising tax rates chases businesses to other countries with lower rates.
More industry, more production, more revenues for government.
Higher tax rates, less industry, less production, less revenue for government.
You are so wrong. If we were selling oil to Europe like we could be, they would not need Russian oil. There would be no war in Ukraine. It's a Democrat plan to start this war, starting with Hunter's dealings in Ukraine and leading us to the brink today. The Democrat war machine is under way.
Thousands of Venezuelans crowded at our border would beg to differ about socialist "progressivism". They have seen the pain of such policies firsthand. If they do become citizens they will turn America deeper red.
Here is an example of climate change as a religion.
Keep in mind, this woman's husband has lost his mother, and they are on the way to her funeral. I would feel sorry for him but he obviously has allowed her to ruin his life long before this event. He should have stayed on the plane and spent some time with his family.
No such thing has been verified. In fact, to the contrary. The IPCC climate model predictions have run higher than observation almost from day 1. Every paper filed with the IPCC contains the disclaimer that models cannot account for the action of clouds. Clouds just happen to be the very thing that carry heat aloft above the greenhouse blanket, and release it into space via infrared radiation. Hurricanes happen in the fall when the warm waters exceed air temperature. The imbalance creates a tropical storm which is a heat engine. The heat engine carries heat aloft and radiates it into space. That is only one mechanism not accounted for in climate models.
The entire atmosphere is constantly circulating from ground level to high altitude. As it does so it carries water vapor aloft where it radiates infrared energy. The radiation at high altitude is free to escape into space, and is blocked from coming down by the denser atmospheric blanket below. The net flow of energy is outbound. That is how the planet self-regulates temperature. That is not modeled in climate models, which is why they are always wrong on the high side.
It's 100% a scam. For Democrats, it's a substitute for religion.
Gee! I wonder why the thousands of climate scientists have never thought of that for the last 300 + years they have studied the subject and how the Exxon scientists overlooked this alternative theory, even though they were incentivized to find an alternative explanation? Yet, you discovered that there are "scientists" around that are paid to discredit the dominant theory despite its verification.
As you are aware for something to be a scientific cause it has to either occur before the event that it is hypothesized to cause or concomitantly with the event. Your explanation doesn't meet that standard. However, I understand the effects of religious conviction despite the fact that a lot of true believers have changed their thinking about climate change and its causation, in just the past six years. The world is getting hotter and green house gases are being produced in greater amounts from more sources. I think a presidential candidate who claimed that CC is a "hoax" would be laughed off the stage today. You can check your theory against this debunking site if you wish:
Desmog is not a debunking site. It's a political site.
There are not a thousand climate scientists in the world, so your comment is baloney. And I suppose you are going to tell me that they work for free.
Look at any paper in the IPCC website dealing with climate models. The actual scientists admit that they cannot adequately model the action of clouds. You won't see the disclaimers in the Summary for Policymakers because that group is political appointees. The whole organization was not arranged to prove or disprove climate change. Theirs is a foregone conclusion and their sole purpose is to design mitigation such as taxes and non-industrialization agreements to mitigate their foregone conclusion.
The purpose of the IPCC is to wage taxes on fossil fuel and redistribute wealth to poor nations in exchange for their agreement to not industrialize. They are in the business of setting up an international system of welfare states.
As a body of non-elected political appointees, the UN has no authority to wage taxes on any American. Only by treaties signed by Democrats are they able to breach our sovereignty. That is exactly what they want, to become the taxing body for the world. The very small group of scientists working for the IPCC are doing it for the money and the power. Of course they will not object to their masters leaving off the quiet part about clouds and climate models.
As Governor of a Peninsula that has been a target of severe hurricane threats, what is DeSantis's position on Climate Change? Has DeSantis proposed raising the income tax in Florida, to pay for the recent damages of Hurricane Ian and create a fund to cover future hurricane destruction and sea level rise? Or is he relying mainly on the Federal Government to bail Floridians out? I've heard Ian's damage estimates are ranging as high as 258 Billion! How do DeSantis's Climate Change remediation efforts stack up against the the ever increasing environmental threats the State faces? Given the upheaval and destruction of Ian, it seems like he has no responsible choice but to raise the tax base significantly. Something that should have happened four years ago, just to deal with the other environmental problems Florida is facing, in the Everglades, Biodiversity, Invasive species, fungus endangering some non-native palms, drinking water from pollution and waste:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_issues_in_Florida
Will DeSantis become a responsible Governor and raise taxes sufficiently to do what is necessary to protect Floridians, or will he just hope for the best and keep listening to his major sponsor, Charles Koch, and forget about the future of Florida? Glaciers are melting in the north and the waters around the Peninsula are getting warmer. No one can say he wasn't warned, but I guess it's a lot cheaper and easier to go after Disney, get CRT out of kindergarten, grade school, and high school where it doesn't even exist, and ban and burn some books. Yale should really be ashamed graduating such an irresponsible, juvenile delinquent, and con man.
https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida/
His policy on climate change has no effect on the current hurricanes.
Rather than the hype from Gore, try looking at science based recommendations, namely adaptation and reducing worldwide poverty first.
What DeSantis policy on Climate Change are you referring to? It doesn't appear he is close to being up to the task. He's been in office for four years and has invested nearly nothing on remediation compared to the immense costs incurred by climate change. Moreover he's relied and mooched off the Fed Government.
We could certainly learn a lot from the Dutch regarding adaptation
No one has any business building on the coast unless they can afford to rebuild or are insured. If you can afford to build there you can afford private insurance or self insurance. No more bailouts. That is not the purpose of government.
As for Climate Change, a mere 20,000 years ago the sea level was 120 meters lower than today. The next glaciation is expected within 10,000 years. Glaciations tend to last 200,000 years, and are more common than warm periods like today, so try to enjoy the best of times.
Somehow , "...a mere 20,000 years ago sea level was 120 meters lower than it is today" isn't that comforting when the scientific consensus is significant sea level rise will occur before 2050:
https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida.
As you are aware the theory of climate change is generally based on the assumption and verification that our burning of green house gases is causing the earth to warm. Climate scientists came to this conclusion late in the 19th century. Exxon scientists confirmed this theory as early as 1980, according to their internal documents.
Also, Ian penetrated and caused damage 20 miles inland where a lot of not so rich people reside. It's not that hard to envision how much worse life can get on a Peninsula if remediation measures aren't funded and addressed. It is exactly one of the primary functions of government to inform and protect it's citizens. Millions of people living in Florida, along with all of its other environmental issues, will be impacted.
We need to start evaluating our leaders based on how they handle their State and Nation's deferred maintenance, especially when tax revenues are insufficient to adequately address our critical challenges, and not addressing a problem is prohibitively more expensive and impossible to remedy. Many of our problems are National and Global in scope, which requires our leaders to intelligent, informed, diplomatic, and persistent in working cooperatively to find solutions.
Robert,
This line from your article:
"The sea level around Florida is up to 8 inches higher than it was in 1950.1 | 2 This increase is mostly due to ice melting into the ocean and, complicated by the porous limestone that the state sits on, it’s causing major issues."
Can you guess why the soil in Southern Florida is limestone?
Sea level has not risen 8 inches since 1950. This is wrong.
Take a look at the graph in the linked article. Also note that even though we are burning much more fossil fuel than we were in the 1800's, the rate of sea level rise has remained constant. It's just a continuation of the natural rise that began 20,000 years ago.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level#:~:text=April%2019%2C%202022-,Highlights,3.8%20inches)%20above%201993%20levels.
One of the first things you should understand about the consequences of climate change is they aren't distributed uniformly. The article I referred you to was focused on Florida. Had you known anything about climate science you would have understood this. Reread the article I sent to you:
https://sealevelrise.org/states/florida/
Also, please comment on the inadequate amount of money DeSantis has committed to mitigate the climate crisis in relation to the astronomical costs Florida is incurring. Also note how lucky Florida has been is dodging other hurricanes like Dorian that zigged east instead of west.
For your reference: https://www.axios.com/2022/10/07/hurricane-ian-damage-estimate-costliest-storm-florida. This estimate is preliminary and not comprehensive. Most estimates are based on insured losses or only limited to property damage. The range of estimates are as high as 258 Billion and may be even higher. For a better understanding refer to the following:
https://maritime-executive.com/editorials/calculating-the-cost-of-hurricane-ian
What is Florida doing about climate change?
DeSantis' focus has been on trying to adapt Florida to climate change, what he calls “resilience,” and under his leadership, the state is starting to spend at least $1 billion to gird against impacts from future extreme weather through a new Resilient Florida program established by legislation he signed in May of 2021.Oct 13, 2022
His governance is ideologically irresponsible and juvenile. It's really hard to escape the consequences of fraud against the people of State of Florida. He needs to raise the State income revenue by 40-50% with the new revenue dedicated to CC mitigation. Instead of banning books, he needs to radically change the building codes and requirements, and alert his constituents about the New Normal and what must be done to prevent a knockout!
You should also understand that the consequences of climate change are not limited to Florida and coastal properties:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2022/fema-flood-risk-maps-failures/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=wp_energy_and_environment&wpisrc=nl_green
Reread the article:
"Unfortunately, slightly higher sea levels make hurricanes even more damaging. Just a few more inches of sea level rise allow a hurricane to push more water onto the land, even if the hurricane itself doesn’t make landfall."
I did read the article, and I am well aware of that factor. It's a BS argument. In New Orleans they build as much as 8 feet below sea level. It's encouraged by Government backed loans, flood insurance and FEMA rebuilding. All at our expense. This is not the purpose of Government at all. Our tax money would be better spent simply educating people in geology so that they know better what to expect.
Beach houses today are McMansions, so sure the cost of rebuilding is more. Back in my day, coastal structures were always shacks which could be easily rebuilt after a storm. The cost was minimal.
You are also forgetting that sea levels have been rising for 20,000 years (120 meters). Folks building in coastal areas should be aware of this ongoing trend. Again, Florida soil is composed of decayed sea life deposited when it was under water.
The reason hurricanes are more damaging today is because there are more expensive homes in coastal regions. Government insurance encourages it.
You do understand we are in a worsening period of both sea level rise and warmer water that after a certain point is irreversible and more destructive..
Here is a clue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_sea_level
I love it when folks begin with "You do understand..". Especially when they are so wrong.
You do understand why the soil in South Florida is composed of Limestone, right? Same with the Yucatan Peninsula.
Explain sea level rise and warming oceans since we started pumping mega doses of green house gases into the atmosphere?
The soil in south Florida is composed of limestone. The shells of ancient sea life. You see, Florida has been submerged beneath the ocean many times before. The sea levels rise and fall naturally. Natural variability cannot be simply ignored, unless you are unfamiliar with geologic history.
Attributing climate change to human activity is the definition of hubris.
First answer my question. Why is the soil in Southern Florida limestone?
Robert,
"It is exactly one of the functions of government to inform and protect it's citizens."
Do you think it is government's job to protect citizens from hurricanes? Isn't it more the citizens responsibility to get out of the way when one approaches. Government does fund our early warning mechanisms to warn citizens, and they are very good at predicting the path a few days in advance. Government has also been very good at building evacuation routes to assist in evacuation. Beyond those basic functions, Government cannot stop hurricanes from happening.
The reason we have too much government today is that people ask too much of government. Government did not stop a pandemic, nor can they stop nature from fires, floods and crop failures. It is up to the citizens to protect themselves, as it should be. Those who are irresponsible suffer the consequences.
Government has actually been counterproductive in some cases. Providing subsidized insurance in flood prone areas attracts people to those areas. It mainly attracts people who can least afford such tragedy. It should never be used to insure a mansion on the beach for a rich person. He should pay for normal private insurance or pay to rebuild out of his own pocket. The whole program is immensely wasteful. It invites tragedy to those who can least afford it.
What happened to the Democrat of my day, like JFK? What became of "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Today this sounds like a Republican motto. Democrats just keep asking for more and more from their country.
Please point me in the direction of a Republican today who incorporates one trait of JFK. At least Nixon knew about foreign policy and could discuss various topics. Trump, a Republican, dealt Russia a royal flush on foreign policy and is largely responsible for Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
I do agree with you that the ultra wealthy and corporations should pay their own way and not receive government welfare, particularly when they are exempted from what use to be a progressive income system - the same one that financed and won two world wars, rebuilt Germany and Japan, and supported a rising middle-class, a higher educational system with affordable fees, and invested in our infrastructure while paying off our debt. We could be a better empire and have a better world if only we would reinstall a progressive income tax system without loopholes. No one likes paying taxes, but taxes are the price we pay for civilization, being a global leader, and having a more cohesive democracy.
One last thing. More productivity, such as oil exporting, generates more tax revenue without raising tax rates. Raising tax rates chases businesses to other countries with lower rates.
More industry, more production, more revenues for government.
Higher tax rates, less industry, less production, less revenue for government.
You are so wrong. If we were selling oil to Europe like we could be, they would not need Russian oil. There would be no war in Ukraine. It's a Democrat plan to start this war, starting with Hunter's dealings in Ukraine and leading us to the brink today. The Democrat war machine is under way.
JFK is rolling in his grave.
Thousands of Venezuelans crowded at our border would beg to differ about socialist "progressivism". They have seen the pain of such policies firsthand. If they do become citizens they will turn America deeper red.
Here is an example of climate change as a religion.
Keep in mind, this woman's husband has lost his mother, and they are on the way to her funeral. I would feel sorry for him but he obviously has allowed her to ruin his life long before this event. He should have stayed on the plane and spent some time with his family.
https://youtu.be/8nOu0WiuSIo
No such thing has been verified. In fact, to the contrary. The IPCC climate model predictions have run higher than observation almost from day 1. Every paper filed with the IPCC contains the disclaimer that models cannot account for the action of clouds. Clouds just happen to be the very thing that carry heat aloft above the greenhouse blanket, and release it into space via infrared radiation. Hurricanes happen in the fall when the warm waters exceed air temperature. The imbalance creates a tropical storm which is a heat engine. The heat engine carries heat aloft and radiates it into space. That is only one mechanism not accounted for in climate models.
The entire atmosphere is constantly circulating from ground level to high altitude. As it does so it carries water vapor aloft where it radiates infrared energy. The radiation at high altitude is free to escape into space, and is blocked from coming down by the denser atmospheric blanket below. The net flow of energy is outbound. That is how the planet self-regulates temperature. That is not modeled in climate models, which is why they are always wrong on the high side.
It's 100% a scam. For Democrats, it's a substitute for religion.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-change-global-warming-computer-model-11642191155?st=5eotefamj84zvvz&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Gee! I wonder why the thousands of climate scientists have never thought of that for the last 300 + years they have studied the subject and how the Exxon scientists overlooked this alternative theory, even though they were incentivized to find an alternative explanation? Yet, you discovered that there are "scientists" around that are paid to discredit the dominant theory despite its verification.
As you are aware for something to be a scientific cause it has to either occur before the event that it is hypothesized to cause or concomitantly with the event. Your explanation doesn't meet that standard. However, I understand the effects of religious conviction despite the fact that a lot of true believers have changed their thinking about climate change and its causation, in just the past six years. The world is getting hotter and green house gases are being produced in greater amounts from more sources. I think a presidential candidate who claimed that CC is a "hoax" would be laughed off the stage today. You can check your theory against this debunking site if you wish:
https://www.desmog.com/
Robert,
It's not "my theory". Here is one of many scientists who know a bit about atmospheric dynamics.
https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/asl.219
Desmog is not a debunking site. It's a political site.
There are not a thousand climate scientists in the world, so your comment is baloney. And I suppose you are going to tell me that they work for free.
Look at any paper in the IPCC website dealing with climate models. The actual scientists admit that they cannot adequately model the action of clouds. You won't see the disclaimers in the Summary for Policymakers because that group is political appointees. The whole organization was not arranged to prove or disprove climate change. Theirs is a foregone conclusion and their sole purpose is to design mitigation such as taxes and non-industrialization agreements to mitigate their foregone conclusion.
The purpose of the IPCC is to wage taxes on fossil fuel and redistribute wealth to poor nations in exchange for their agreement to not industrialize. They are in the business of setting up an international system of welfare states.
As a body of non-elected political appointees, the UN has no authority to wage taxes on any American. Only by treaties signed by Democrats are they able to breach our sovereignty. That is exactly what they want, to become the taxing body for the world. The very small group of scientists working for the IPCC are doing it for the money and the power. Of course they will not object to their masters leaving off the quiet part about clouds and climate models.
He lives under a rock. From what I’ve heard, he doesn’t even believe in climate change, and he will never ever raise taxes.