« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Carbon Credits for Condoms

In which the Environmental Left tips its hand: they are ghastly, beastly people.

By: Steve Maley (Diary)  |  October 25th, 2009 at 07:56 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA


NYT Environment Reporter Floats Idea: Give Carbon Credits to Couples That Limit Themselves to One Child

Washington (CNSNews.com) – Andrew Revkin, who reports on environmental issues for The New York Times, floated an idea last week for combating global warming: Give carbon credits to couples that limit themselves to having one child.

Revkin later told CNSNews.com that he was not endorsing the idea, just trying to provoke some thinking on the topic.

Revkin calls it a “thought experiment”.

Well, isn’t that special.

Around my office, we have a few running jokes. Well, more than a few actually; we have 947 of them, to be precise.

One of the all time faves is based on truth: during a brainstorming session, a young professional prefaced his contribution with his remarks by saying, “Now, I’m not thinkin’ this, I’m just sayin’ it.”

“Not thinkin’, just sayin’” serves to absolve the “sayer” of the logical consequences of whatever words follow. Yeah, right.

Revkin goes on to not think, just say:

Well, should there be carbon credits for a family planning program in Africa let’s say? Should that be monetized as a part of something that, you know, if you, if you can measurably somehow divert fertility rate, say toward an accelerating decline in a place with a high fertility rate, shouldn’t there be a carbon value to that?

… [P]robably the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it’s having fewer kids, having fewer children. … [E]ventually you get … credit–If we’re going to become carbon-centric–for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three.”

In a Sept. 19, 2009 blog entry, “Are Condoms the Ultimate Green-Technology?” Revkin cited an August 2009 study by the London School of Economics that highlighted having fewer children as a solution to diminishing our carbon footprint.
[emphasis added throughout]

I’ve warned in these pages of the dangers of carbon credits as new “funny money” — off-balance-sheet financing for whatever hare-brained idea strikes the Congress’s fancy.

This proposal would let them play the role of the Chinese Politburo. Since it’s only a “thought experiment”, wouldn’t the most efficient use of those valuable carbon credits would be to pay for the, um, negating of children who’ve already been conceived … or to pay for voluntary sterilizations … hmmm?

H/T Doug Bandow, of the American Spectator blog, who comments:

Heck, if Congress votes to wreck the economy with cap and trade, and nationalize the health care system, who is going to want to have kids? Maybe that’s the Obama administration’s secret plan. Make us so miserable that population growth will drop to zero!

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • penguin2

    Cap and Trade passes and you have these carbon credits, people are going to be trading in their babies and their grandparents…

    These people may have bizarre ideas, but they have been gaining power and control for the past 50 yrs.

  • USNJIMRET

    especially a sister, I wonder if he would agree that it would do the world good if she was removed from the global human carbon footprint? Or perhaps he would be willing to terminate his own carbon generation, just to prove an example of course.
    It is incredible to me that people who should know better, float these kind of concepts as “just think’ out loud”, believing that no one will ever take the idea and run with it.
    Might as well say that the carbon footprint of tall, or heavy people are above average, so why not terminate them, just saying, not thinkin’.
    Sheesh…..

    • martyinaz

      This is a little off point but, I would rather provide my son with a box of condoms, than have the government provide my daughter with an abortion and not even tell me about it.

  • bk

    This would be another way to look it, while keeping it alliterative of course.

    Government funding of abortions would be called a “green” program.

    • martyinaz

      The cost of a box of condums
      martyinaz Tuesday, October 27th at 2:05AM EDT (link)
      This is a little off point but, I would rather provide my son with a box of condoms, than have the government provide my daughter with an abortion and not even tell me about it.

  • USNJIMRET

    Cash for Condoms…
    Rebates for Rubbers…..
    OK, that’s all I got.

    • pilgrim

      dollars for dildos
      gold for geldings

  • Order and Chaos

    people wonder why we think enviromentalists are nuts.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    More insanity and contradiction from the loony Left.

    Who is pushing for amnesty for 20 million carbon footprints with high fertility rates?

    Who subsidizes poverty and the production of carbon footprints by the poor via countless support prohrams for the poos such as SCHIP, Medicaid, free lunch programs, free immunizations, etc that don’t provide any disincentives for the poor to not have little carbon footprints.

    Who subsidizes poverty throughout the 3rd world allowing 3rd world nations to produce populations higher than they would be able to sustain without aid.

    Who runs PETA and yet says we should only have pets that we can eat?

    Want to control world population? Stop subsidizing poverty.

    Want to control US population? Demand the deportation of illegals, strict border controls, and stop subsidizing poverty.

    Notice that the Left only demands that white, middle class US and European families limit their children.

    They are certifiable lunatics and extremely dangerous to our freedom.

    They may not offer carbon credits but I can see them phasing out the tax deduction for people that have more than two children.

    The Left should do Mother Earth a big favor and commit mass suicide. If they’re serious that is.

  • http://www.redstate.com/tnjim TNJim

    that makes me think of a Ponzi scheme? Isn’t Bernie Madoff in jail for running one of those?

    This “Cash for Condoms” as USNJIMRET put it just makes me think of the dependance Ponzi schemes have on luring in new investors to pay off the current ones.

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      from the old nursery rhyme The Emperor’s New Clothes. They are selling a negative. something that literally does not exist.

  • 6eorge Jetson

    Maybe we should just free all of the convicted killers to lower our carbon footprint.

    • http://impudent.blognation.us/blog kyle8

      cause a lot of carbon

  • GregInFla

    Thanks to reading Mark Steyn, I know that you need an average 2.1-plus children per couple to sustain a culture. Numerous European countries are currently below that (Greece and Italy are among them). I am totally sick of these intellectuals (who sound like that are right out of Atlas Shrugged postulating how to make a better world. By wanting to always tinker with everything, they demonstrate that they do not like the current world (which generated them, by the way) and that they feel self-appointed to fix it. The Obamadministration is full of these intellectuals, and it is ruining our country.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    So, if people start having fewer children can we do away with SS? At the very least those that choose to not have children or who choose to have only one they should accept no SS benefits or significantly reduced benefits. They shouldn’t be allowed to burden the children of other Americans.

    I look at my children as an investment in our nation’s future. The price I pay to raise them will be returned to me in many ways including someone to pay in to the SS Ponzi scheme. If it still exists when I retire.

  • makemyday

    This is nothing more than someone saw no one had a claim to air and found a way using the present hysteria to claim ownership, control and thusly the right to regulate. The government has done this for 80 or 90 years with the frequency auctions by the FCC. In the early days of super het radios using analog tuners there was a tendency for broadcast frequencies to drift up or down band and interfere with another broadcaster hence the regulation. With the digital age and digital tuning that problem is resolved, wala more bandwidth to sell even though the need for oversight over the original problem is gone. Wall Street will be complicit in this as they will be allowed to sell carbon credit securities. They have finally found a way to tax the air you breathe.

    • Xasteius

      Think that pretty much rules out most of DC’s inhabitants.

    • makemyday

      I will admit to a few nips of some good Tennessee sour mash before posting it. Sorry

      • Xasteius
      • makemyday

        Think of carbon output of growing corn, transportation of same, fermentation of same, the distllation, the charcoal creation and filtration, the charring of the barrels, the aging process, the bottling and transportation to the wholsale market and then retail markets. Then I have to drive to work to earn enough disposable income to drive to said retail market and purchase said distilled product. This is going to cost me a fortune if they pass this crap! We have to put an end to this madness now!!!!!!

  • marshmom

    __”Maybe that?s the Obama administration?s secret plan. Make us so miserable that population growth will drop to zero!” ____

    The population growth won’t drop………just the non-immigrant population. We’ll still have an influx of Mexican and Muslim immigrants, among a few others.

    Also, I’m sure the Chinese “one child rule” started with only a thought as well. This pseudo-journalist needs to spend less time studying communism and more time studying the founding of America and our CONSTITUTION.

  • antisocial

    No wonder this administration is filled with Mao admirers. It all comes down to eugenics. Mere mention of eugenics might sound fear mongering. At the heart of all explanations this is THE factor. At least population control.

  • jeepnpat1

    So if carbon credits would be the new currency and all their programs would be deemed as the new ‘green programs.’ Therefore, if we all constantly went into our nearest Planned Parenthood office and received credits for condoms, abortions or whatever they deemed as their policy then what kind of a society have we become? More self-actualized? Really? Planned Parenthood would be like the local foodstamp office with a line of people desperate to do whatever it takes to get their hands on free currency…

    ‘I’m just saying.’

  • izoneguy

    If you limit the growth of future tax payers then the socialists will run out of other people’s money even faster…..

  • http://novakforcongress.com darianovak

    China will be suffering from their one-child policy terribly in the coming decades as the gender ratio of the population is heavily skewed toward males and not growing at a proper rate. They will have to import brides and it is going to impact their economic development. We shouldn’t be looking toward communist China for solutions, we should be turning to the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution.

    So, what to do?

    Field more principled conservatives who want to run for office. That means teaching our nation’s youth about the value of participating in politics; that it’s a right, duty, and privilege. The Republican Party in many states has turned its back on conservatives in favor of candidates with money, even if they are not principled. It is America’s loss.

    China is a nation full of little princes and is controlled by a single Party. People give up political freedom to sustain a certain relatively low level of economic development. I have lived in China and you wouldn’t want that system here. Part of the reason I am running for US Congress (CT-2) is to try to stop this insanity. I do not comprehend why after only a short period in time we have forgotten the good lessons that Ronald Reagan taught us.

    How can the Republican Party have lost its way so quickly? I can remember talking with the President on several occasions and his telling me to never forget how quickly our freedom can be lost. At that time we were riding high with big changes in Washington. It was something I thought could never happen again. But, the changes we implemented weren’t deep enough.

    There are 3 general levels of culture. At the most superficial level are those things we can see in others or “behaviors.” They are temporary and go away when another behavior is more convenient or rewarded. At a deeper level are “attitudes” and at the core of culture are “values.”

    We, in the Reagan Administration, successfully changed some behaviors in Washington. BUT, those were not lasting alterations, nor were they deep or taken as truths by the people.

    We only changed a very few minds at the level of “attitudes,” or the way we look at how government should operate. Today, I do not believe we were successful at all in changing the “value” system in Washington politics. Those are the lasting changes that create a new core of our culture or a return to a past success. I find we are in a worse position today than when President Reagan assumed office.

    We actually have people in this country who would turn over their political freedom to a new slave master — the federal govenrment — in return for a low level of economic security. President Reagan warned us, the Soviets predicted it, and the Chinese are benefitting from it. This is the 11th hour and we must not only speak about principled politics, but we must ACT on it.

    Support conservative candidates. Make phone calls and volunteer. Teach children about what the US Constitution means and why we are different than other nations. If you need help I founded the Constitution Brigade to do this in CT. You are not alone. Contact me at daria@novakforcongress.com and we will help you find your way forward toward protecting a free and prosperous America. There are solutions within our reach.

  • dclamage

    The carbon footprint of a native African living off the land is about as close to zero as, say, a lion. Heck, the lion probably has a higher carbon footprint — it eats primarily herbivores and mates with as many lionesses as possible.

    But it’s still infinitesmally small.

  • dennism

    More effective I think to stamp out vaginal intercourse, with the added plus that there won’t be those eco-unfriendly used condoms to dispose of…

    I thought the lefties wanted the righties out of the bedroom.

  • http://www.BTWsociety.org racvt

    It’s sad that liberals see humans are the source of the problem – not the solution. Such pessimism never does anything to solve the problems of the less fortunate.
    Such idiotic “saying” would lead only to shooting ourselves in the foot.
    Oh wait, Muslims will choose to be less prolific. Yeah, right.

  • utahrepublican

    Obama and the enviros aren’t seeking zero population growth. They want zero population, period. (Except, of course, for themselves and a worldwide group of 200,000 or so of his closest friends and financial supporters.)