Americans overwhelmingly oppose expensive Green New Deal programs
By Bob Unruh – WND
A new poll from Competitive Enterprise Institute reveals that Americans’ financial dedication to the Green New Deal that leftists have been demanding for several years already is lagging.
Just a little bit.
The proposal as outlined by some members of Congress would cost taxpayers up to $93 trillion, which the Foundation for Education pointed out at nearly $600,000 per U.S. household was “truly astounding.”
Yet “most Americans aren’t even willing to sacrifice $50 a month to mitigate climate change,” the report said.
The CEI results sampled 1,200 registered voters on environmental issues, and the margin of error was 2.83%.
Lots of people, “a strong majority,” said they were somewhat or very concerned about climate change, FEE documented.
But the key question was, “How much of your own money would you be willing to personally spend each month to reduce the impact of climate change?”
Nothing, said 35%.
Another 15% said they give up $1-$10 and 6% said $11-$20.
Another handful would add $10 to that figure, but “a whopping 75% of respondents were not willing to pay more than $50 a month,” the report said.
FEE said, “One need not extrapolate very far from this data to conclude that essentially zero American households are willing to pay $600,000 a year for a ‘Green New Deal’-style big-government climate change agenda.”
Myron Ebell, chief of the CEI’s Center for Energy and Environment, noted, “This poll shows once again that Americans are unwilling to pay for the left’s anti-energy policies.”
There was a small fraction, 4%, who would be willing to spend up to $500 of their own money.
New Zealand Suffers All-Time Record Cold, as Greenland Snow & Ice GAINS head Off the Charts [literally] (Ironically!)
Back in the real world:
The temperature–CO2 climate connection: an epistemological reappraisal of ice-core messages
As simply based on fundamental logic and on the concepts of cause and effect, an epistemological examination of the geochemical analyses performed on the Vostok ice cores invalidates the marked greenhouse effect on past climate usually assigned to CO2 and CH4. In agreement with the determining role assigned to Milankovitch cycles, temperature has, instead, constantly remained the long-term controlling parameter during the past 423 kyr, which, in turn, determined both CO2 and CH4 concentrations, whose variations exerted, at most, a minor feedback on temperature itself. If not refuted, the demonstration indicates that the greenhouse effect of CO2 on 20th century and today’s climate remains to be documented, as already concluded from other evidence. The epistemological weakness of current simulations originates from the fact that they do not rely on any independent evidence for the influence of greenhouse gases on climate over long enough periods of time. The validity of models will, in particular, not be demonstrated as long as at least the most important features of climate changes, namely the glacial–interglacial transitions and the differing durations of interglacial periods, remain unaccounted for. Similarly, the constant 7 kyr time lag between temperature and CO2 decreases following deglaciation is another important feature that needs to be understood. Considered in this light, the current climate debate should be considered as being the latest of the great controversies that have punctuated the march of the Earth sciences, although its markedly differs from the preceding ones by its most varied social, environmental, economical and political ramifications.