Yesterday students walked out of school to demand that us adults do something about global warming and climate change.
According to The Guardian, many students expressed anger, fear and disappointment that adults have not acted on the “crisis” our world faces. Many also expressed hope for a green economy within 11 years, the timeframe experts at the United Nations believe is necessary to forestall catastrophic climate change.
So the youth skipped classes and carried signs to protest. Notice the irony in this photo:
If “winter is not coming,” then why aren’t they all wearing shorts and tank tops?
From NY Post: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to pass sweeping tax hikes on the wealthy, but the freshman lawmaker might want to take care of her own unpaid tax bill first.
Brook Avenue Press, a company she founded in 2012 to publish children’s books in The Bronx, owes the state $1,870.36 in corporate taxes, public records show.
The state slapped the company with a warrant on July 6, 2017, two months after Ocasio-Cortez announced her candidacy to run against Democratic incumbent Joe Crowley for the district that encompasses parts of Queens and The Bronx.
The state requires businesses to pay a corporation tax on a sliding scale based on revenue. The minimum payment last year was $25. “The company probably got numerous letters from the state and probably ignored them,” one New York City accountant theorized.
Public records show the state dissolved the company in October 2016, which can happen when a business fails to pay corporate taxes or file a return.
The state Tax Department won’t comment on individual companies but typically files warrants as a last resort after trying to collect money. “This is the first we’re hearing of it, and we won’t have any additional comment until we look into it,” Ocasio-Cortez’s spokesman, Corbin Trent, said Saturday.
Brook Avenue Press was set up to “develop and identify stories and literature in urban areas like New York, specifically communities like The Bronx,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a YouTube video posted in October 2011, months before she filed incorporation papers for the company in July 2012.
The company relied on cheap office space in a city-subsidized program to help small businesses in The Bronx. Called the Sunshine Bronx Business Incubator, the program was housed in a renovated former printing plant in Hunts Point, where rates for office spaces and tech services in 2012 averaged between $99 for a “virtual office” and $275 per month for local start-ups.
Ocasio-Cortez was featured on the city’s website for the incubator, and The National Hispanic Institute named her a social entrepreneur in residence. “You see a huge return on your investment here,” a 22-year-old Ocasio-Cortez told a reporter in July 2012. “People pay $500 an hour for consulting that we get for free by the water cooler.”
The tax warrant was issued to Brook Avenue Press at the incubator’s address on Garrison Avenue.
But despite her promise to work with “designers, artists and authors that really know the urban story and help develop stories for kids,” The Post could not find any books the publishing house produced.
Last week, Ocasio-Cortez signed on to a bill to tax stock trades and has previously called for a 70 percent tax on incomes over $10 million in order to help finance the Green New Deal, her environmental manifesto calling for “new national, social, industrial and economic mobilization” to save the planet.
DCG
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
I’m glad this womyn will not breed. We have enough stoopid fear-mongers in the world…
From the YouTube video description:
“A group of 60 women and men have come together to declare they will not have children due to the growing threat of climate change and ecological collapse. Going by the name ‘BirthStrike’, the group feels so affected by the ecological catastrophe, and so disappointed by the reaction of world leaders, that they feel too concerned to pass this burden onto a child.
Our series of interviews starts with Alice Brown, 24, who discusses her decision not to have children due to the threat climate breakdown.
If you have made a similar decision and would like to join BirthStrike or be interviewed, please contact us at: BirthStrike@gmail.com
For media enquiries: BirthStrikeMedia@gmail.com
BirthStrike.tumblr.com
#BirthStrike”
The woman in this video, Alice Brown, states, “I’m not on a career path anymore. There’s no career for me. I actually don’t see a future sometimes. I don’t feel there’s any point in doing anything until we’re in a consensus together to make this a healthier and safer world for everything.”
Shame on progressives for terrifying young people into believing they have no future. Shame on public indoctrination bureaucrats for terrifying their students into believing they have no future worth living for.
What happened to “the children are our future?”
The climate change zealots/socialists/communists are hell-bent on destroying our future. Don’t give them an inch…
Like so many Democrats, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is a hypocrite.
AOC is a leading advocate of the Green New Deal that, in the name of climate change and saving the environment, aims to end America’s reliance on fossil fuels in 10 years, at a cost estimated by the American Action Forum to be $93 trillion.
Speaking of herself and her fellow millennials, AOC said: “We’re like, ‘The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.’ And, like, this is the war; this is our World War II.”
She even questioned whether young people should have children, because “Our planet is going to face disaster if we don’t turn this ship around” and “the lives of children are going to be very difficult.”
AOC herself, however, does not practice what she preaches.
The New York Post reports that AOC was treated as a liberal savior at yesterday’s “inclusive” St. Pat’s for All parade:
Councilman Daniel Dromm (D-Queens) introduced her as “somebody who has been shaking up Washington, DC, the political world, and has been talking truth to power.”
City Comptroller Scott Stringer likened Ocasio-Cortez to his cousin, the late US Rep. Bella Abzug, saying that “when she [Abzug] got elected they said the same things about her and they tried to slow her down.”
Despite getting a hero’s welcome, AOC ducked out of the parade before the end and hopped into a chauffered white minivan at 48th Street and Skillman Avenue, a mere 5-minute walk from a subway station (at 46th and Bliss).
The 2016 white Chrysler Town & Country minivan gets an average of just 17 mpg in the city, according to the US Department of Energy.
A day ago, the New York Post reported on the reliance of AOC’s political campaign on gas-guzzling cars and planes, instead of public transit, even though a subway station was just a one-minute walk (138 feet) from her Elmhurst campaign office in Queens:
In all, AOC’s campaign spent $25,174.54 on 66 airline transactions, and $29,365.70 on emissions-spewing vehicles, including 1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.
AOC’s campaign shelled out only $8,335.41 on 52 MetroCard (public transit) transactions.
AOC or her staff took Amtrak only 18 times, despite high-speed rail being the cornerstone of her Green New Deal.
In contrast, fellow freshman Rep. Max Rose (D-NY) — whose 11th district is more than twice the size of AOC’s, but has limited public transit options — listed only 329 transactions for car services, totaling $6,091.29.
From Fox News: Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said young people have to ask a “legitimate question” in the wake of climate change and mounting student loan debt: “Is it okay to still have children?”
In an Instagram Live video over the weekend, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., welcomed supporters into her kitchen—and gave a “special hello to my haters”—while she made chili and poured herself a glass of white wine.
“Our planet is going to face disaster if we don’t turn this ship around,” she said, as she chopped sweet potatoes. “And so it’s basically like, there is a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult and it does lead, I think young people, to have a legitimate question. Ya know, should—is it okay to still have children?”
She continued: “Not just financially because people are graduating with 20, 30, 100 thousand dollars of student loan debt so they can’t even afford to have kids in the house, but there’s also just this basic moral question, like, what do we do?”
“And even if you don’t have kids, there are still children here in the world and we have a moral obligation to them to leave a better world to them.”
Ocasio-Cortez answered questions from viewers while she continued to prepare her meal. “What would Trump put in chili? BOLOGNA!” she quipped. “He would put bologna in chili. Both because I think that’s what his taste palate is developed to, and for the obvious reason.”
But one of the serious questions was about her signature proposal in the House- the Green New Deal.
“The whole premise of the Green New Deal, is that we’re screwed on climate. I’m sorry to break it to you,” she said. “When it comes to climate in particular, we’re actually screwed. There is a global threat to the planet.”
She added: “At this point, we don’t even have to prove it. Just walk outside in the winter in a lot of places, and its, either way worse than you’re used to, or way warmer than you’re used to.”
“Hurricanes, storms, wildfires,” she said. “We are dying now.”
While the resolution itself would do little because it is non-binding, it is the first time the policy proposal has been formally outlined in Congress.
“If we called a vote on the Green New Deal, tomorrow or Tuesday when I got back to D.C., and it passed, NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN,” she stressed, seemingly downplaying the impact should it be passed. “Literally, nothing would happen because it is a resolution. It is a statement. Be it resolved. It is us agreeing to a statement. Not any binding course of action.”
The resolution says “a new national social, industrial and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal” is an opportunity to tackle systemic injustices toward minority groups, create millions of high-wage jobs and “provide unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States.”
Its proposals include “net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers;” job creation; healthcare for all; infrastructure investment; guarantees of clean water, healthy food and sustainable environment; and a curiously undefined “access to nature.”
Beyond those broad proposals, the plan and accompanying documents from Ocasio-Cortez include a range of far-fetched goals — and drew swift scorn from Republicans and other critics. The Republican National Committee dubbed it a “socialist wish list” that would kill at least 1 million jobs and disrupt global trade — while costing trillions.
From Fox News: Democratic presidential hopeful Kamala Harris pointedly declined in an interview broadcast Sunday to put a price tag on the Green New Deal and “Medicare-for-all,” which she has endorsed wholeheartedly even as Republicans cite nonpartisan cost estimates of trillions of dollars for each unprecedented proposal.
Harris, D-Calif., joined Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Cory Booker, D-N.J. to co-sponsor the Green New Deal resolution earlier this month. The resolution’s botched rollout included the release of an official document by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s office that promised economic security even for those “unwilling to work,” as well as the elimination of “farting cows” and air travel.
“There’s no question we have to be practical. But being practical also recognizes that climate change is an existential threat to us as human beings,” Harris began. “Being practical recognizes that greenhouse gas emissions are threat to our air, and threatening our planet. And that it is well within our capacity as human beings to change our behaviors in a way that we can reduce its effect. That’s practical. Of course we can afford it.”
CNN’s John King asked Harris for her response to conservative arguments that progressive proposals could end up doing more harm than good, by crippling the U.S. economy even as major polluters like China continue unabated.
According to the Mercatus Center at George Washington University, for example, Ocasio-Cortez’s plan for universal Medicare would end up costing more than $30 trillion, even after factoring in the sweeping tax hikes that would offset the expense by only roughly $2 trillion. Charles Blahous, a senior strategist at the Mercatus Center and an author of the study, later charged that Ocasio-Cortez had wildly misinterpreted his study to try to argue that “Medicare-for-all” would save money.
“One of the things that I admire and respect is the measurement that is captured in three letters: ROI,” Harris responded. “What’s the return on investment? People in the private sector understand this really well. It’s not about a cost. It’s about an investment. And then the question should be, is it worth the cost in terms of the investment potential? Are we going to get back more than we put in?”
Harris’ loose invocation of an economics term echoed language by Ocasio-Cortez, who has repeatedly and confidently said “there’s a little thing in economics known as externalities” to justify her Green New Deal proposal.
Silly Kamala…if you are going to calculate the ROI you’d know that the benefit would have to be divided by the cost of the investment. That’s how this ratio works.
But I know math doesn’t really apply when sucking us taxpayers dry.
DCG
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
If you search for “chemtrails” in Wikipedia, you won’t find an entry on chemtrails. Instead, you are directed to the entry, “Chemtrail conspiracy theory,” which begins:
The chemtrail conspiracy theory is based on the erroneous belief that long-lasting condensation trails are “chemtrails” consisting of chemical or biological agents left in the sky by high-flying aircraft, sprayed for nefarious purposes undisclosed to the general public.
If chemtrails are merely a figment of imagination by loony, tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists, why are chemtrails mentioned in a Congressional bill, HR 2977 – Space Preservation Act of 2001?
According to HR 2977, since Congress, in section 102(a) of the
National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2451(a)), states that it “is the policy of the United States that activities in space should be devoted to peaceful purposes for the benefit of all mankind,” the purpose of HR 2977 is:
To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.
To that end, Section 3 of HR 2977 states:
The President shall–
(1) implement a permanent ban on space-based weapons of the United States and remove from space any existing space-based weapons of the United States; and
(2) immediately order the permanent termination of research and development, testing, manufacturing, production, and deployment of all space-based weapons of the United States and their components.
Among the space-based weapons that HR 2977 wants the United States to ban and remove are “exotic weapons systems” that include chemtrails. Section 7 (2) of HR 2977 states:
(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as–
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
(C) The term “exotic weapons systems” includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.
So-called conspiracy theorists have been conservative in their “paranoia”. As listed above, chemtrails are not the only “exotic weapons systems” that HR 2977 seeks to ban and remove. There are others that are even more lethal, including:
Psychotronic weapons that manipulate human behavior with the use of subliminal, either sound or visual, messages.
Tectonic weapons that induce earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or other seismic events.
Introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) nearly 18 years ago on October 2, 2001, HR 2977 has no co-sponsors. Not one.
The bill was referred to the House Committee on Science and the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics. On April 19, 2002, the Department of Defense gave the bill an “unfavorable executive comment,” which effectively killed the bill (see “Actions“).
It is said that in 2002, Rep. Kucinich told Columbus Alive, a free news weekly serving Columbus, Ohio, that they should speak to the Pentagon regarding an “‘ongoing program’ called ‘Vision for 2020’” which was “X-files stuff.” Kucinich claimed that the U.S. Space Command has specific plans for the complete “dominance” and weaponization of space under a program called “Joint Vision for 2020.” A search for “Dennis Kucinich” on Columbus Alive, however, yielded no such article.
But the United States Space Command indeed does have a publication called Vision For 2020. For the full text, click here.
In the video below, a chemtrails pilot speaks out (h/t Maziel):
Combine a left-leaning indoctrination curriculum with young skulls full of mush and you got yourself a whole lot of new democrat voters!
Funny how demorats only care so much about the future for kids AFTER they are born…
Oregon Live reports that demorat state Sen. Shemia Fagan claims that “younger” teens in Oregon should have a say in their future. Demorats in that state are pushing a bill that would amend Oregon’s constitution to lower the voting age in the state from 18 to 16. They hope to put it before voters in 2020.
“Younger Oregonians should have “a chance to participate in the ballot — about decisions that affect their homes, their clean air, their future, their schools and, as we’ve seen, their very lives,” Democratic state Sen. Shemia Fagan said at a Monday press conference announcing the measure.
Teens are “begging us to take action to protect their future,” she added. OPB reported that she referenced the student activists from Parkland, Florida, who launched the “Never Again” movement in the wake of the 2018 mass shooting at their high school.
Several Oregon student activists spoke at the press conference about why they deserved the right to vote before age 18. “We need to be able to take our work to the ballot and protect the policies we’re working so hard to pass,” South Salem High School senior Maria Torres said.
Pressing issues affecting young people have brought the voting age down before. It used to be 21 before the 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1971, lowered it to 18. The amendment was fueled in part by teenagers facing the draft for the Vietnam War, which had become increasingly unpopular.
Congress had lowered the voting age in 1970 for state and federal offices, but Oregon objected to a lower minimum age being foisted on its state elections. It insisted the law was unconstitutional and won in the U.S. Supreme Court. This led to the successful push for the 26th amendment.
The newly introduced Oregon bill seeks to allow Oregonians starting at age 16 to vote in all elections, the Statesman-Journal reported, but such a law ultimately might only apply to state and local elections.”
DCG
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
In September 2016, California governor Jerry Brown signed a bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.
Adam Ashton reports for The Sacramento Bee that methane, a greenhouse gas like carbon dioxide, builds up in dairy manure pits, where farmers store waste for months until they can spread it on the crops they grow to feed their cows. Since agriculture accounts for more than half of California’s methane emissions, this makes it an obvious industry for the state’s Air Resources Board to regulate as it tries to meet the new law’s goal.
In order to comply with the new law, California’s dairy farmers have to purchase expensive methane digesters, each costing several million dollars, to convert the greenhouse gas emitted by cow manure into a source of renewable energy.
The digester covers the cow manure pit with a tarp. As the manure decomposes, methane lifts and becomes trapped under heavy plastic. Several times a day, a small power plant connected to the manure pit draws down the methane and burns it in the same manner that utilities use natural gas.
Daryl Maas, whose Redding-based Maas Energy Works manages the digester in the Van Warmerdam dairy farm, enthused: “We’re generating clean power, and we’re destroying a greenhouse gas. You can’t beat that!” Maas also earns as much as a quarter of his California revenue from selling “offset credits” to businesses that emit large quantities of carbon dioxide, such as oil refineries, which pay dairies with methane digesters to offset their pollution.
But the methane digesters are so expensive that dairies must win a grant to help them get started. A 2014 study from the California Energy Commission found that the digesters are not economically viable without grants.California expects to offer about $50 million in methane reduction grants to dairies, which would buy about 18 to 22 digesters. One dairy farm, the Van Warmerdams, received a grant of about $900,000 from the U.S. Department of Energy and the California Energy Commission to purchase a digester that uses manure from about 1,400 cows to power about 400 homes when it’s running at peak capacity.
Not only must the dairy farmers cobble together the money to purchase the expensive methane digesters, they must also find utilities that would buy the power the digesters generate from cow poop so as to recover the cost of the equipment. But finding utilities takes time away from full-time dairy farming.
Alas, the methane digesters don’t curtail cow burps and cow farts, which emit methane about equal the amount emitted from cow poop.
Founded 12-23-2009. Burned down by WordPress 8-15-2018 with 63M hits. Resurrected 8-23-2018. DDOS attacks began 11-10-2018. Massive Spam attacks on 12-3-2018.
Cinderella Broom
Dave
DCG
Deplorable Patriot
Dr. Eowyn
Grif
Joan
TrailDust