Why Are They So Penal? Why Not Innovate?
Global Warming Cultists Are Quick To Want To Rule And Dictate
Yesterday, we learned how the crazy and obtuse Biden Administration wants to get rid of gas stoves in your home. Buried in the massive spending bill the Democrats and recalcitrant Senate Republicans passed to “fight inflation” was an $840 tax credit to switch from a gas stove to an electric stove.
Personally, after just having rehabbed my house and switching from a gas to an induction range, I want my tax credit. I love induction for me. I hate electric cooktops, they stink if you want to actually cook. Natural gas is efficient and great. LNG isn’t the global warming disaster the cult makes it out to be. Gosh, they just aren’t that smart are they?
But, I don’t understand why the cult of global warming is so penal. Whenever there is some action, problem, or issue, they want to ban it or tax it. Worse, they go off and do precisely the thing they want to ban themselves. Ask AOC how she likes cooking with gas. By the way, no one ever exclaims, “Now we are cooking with electric.”
Another thing they will do is fight innovation tooth and nail at home but if it’s outsourced, it’s somehow okay. The cult of global warming loves to drive in their EVs and hybrids. But, when it comes time for the dirty work of mining the elements it takes to make a battery, we can’t do it in the United States.
Nope, Indonesia. Let those brown poor people deal with the environmental damage. I am wondering if a gas stove is worse for your health or global warming, or a factory belching smoke?
When the cult embraces innovation, it always “feels good but doesn’t work” solar or wind. “Oh, we are making great progress” they will recite to you in between sips of their almond milk shade-grown fair trade coffee latte. “Great Progress”.
Meanwhile, anyone that relies on solar or wind power for their energy doesn’t have any. They get to experience winter cold without heat, or rolling blackouts in the summer. The cult doesn’t experience those things.
When they innovate, they have a guilt complex. They innovate so we don’t experience abundance and a better life. We get less. Solar/Wind are perfect examples of this. It seems the more we innovate around solar, the bigger the promise and it just can’t keep up with what the on-demand information economy world is demanding. It goes without saying that solar fields and wind farms do their own destruction to the environment. We just had a terror attack in Las Vegas which crushed a huge solar field.
When I went to the recent Consumer Electronics Show, I walked the floor just looking around. I saw some cool stuff. I saw some boring stuff. Do we need better massage chairs and headphones? On second thought, maybe we do in order to get away from all the chaos.
Two things stood out to me. Both were made by those terrible large mega-corporations that are going to lose R+D tax credits this year thanks to the Biden Administration.
The first was from John Deere. They have built artificial intelligence into their tractors and seed planters. The seed planter plants the seed and puts just enough fertilizer to make it grow. Farmers use 60% less fertilizer but get the same crop. This makes the water cleaner and the air cleaner. It is significantly more environmentally friendly.
John Deere also is working on autonomous farming. AI tractors that don’t need humans to plant and harvest. The amount of tech in a farmer’s field these days is incredible. The result is we will need fewer people to farm, and we will produce more crops. At the same time, we will be a lot more efficient about it and more environmentally friendly. That’s innovation.
The second was from Nikon. They developed a new coating called Riblet that can be applied to jet engine turbines, jet skins, boat hulls, and things like that. It creates a lot less friction so boats and planes can move more efficiently. A huge cargo boat that travels from China to the US will use 2% less fuel with the coating on its hull. Planes will use 2% less fuel when they fly point to point. That doesn’t sound like a lot until you do the math.
Yes, you can put it on wind turbine blades and they will be more efficient too. But, you still need wind. Maybe you can put one in front of Hakeem Jeffries.
Amidst all the negativity in the world, it was nice to go to the CES and see real innovators working on real solutions to problems without all the guilt. It gives you hope.
They can't compete in the arena of ideas.
I think it just comes down to the core of their "philosophical foundation."
It is my belief that Leftists very much believe that life is a Zero Sum Game, and that this similarly applies to wealth and wealth creation.
Simply put, they believe that wealth (or, innovation as a subset of it) is transferred, not created. Wealthy people "took" money from others, which is why they are bad. When society "uses" resources those resources are "gone" for others to no longer appreciate.
They believe that wealth creation and consumption is simply greedy and selfish. And destructive to others' wellbeing.
So in order to prevent this "resource destruction" they seek to control everyone as much as possible, because people aren't to be trusted.
This may sound overly simplistic, but I have spent years trying to figure out the average psychology and mentality of Leftists. I also believe they are more emotional and prone to irrational arguments.
Have a conversation with a "highly educated" Leftist about "millionaires and billionaires" and they'll get right to telling you why they think "no one should have that much money." When you say to them that money is only a unit of exchange and that NO ONE has to do anything for a billionaire they look at you like you have six eyes. Then, "why does it bother you if you never have to interact or do anything for a billionaire if you don't want? Money is only a measurement of the value that they have to give you in exchange. If you don't want it, they are powerless, no? And, money is a rough measurement of the value they have created for others. Those 'other' did not and would not have to transact with that person if they didn't get value out of the relationship. So what's the problem?"
"I just think that no one should have that kind of money."
"ok."