There is also the constant conflating of climate policy with climate science in order to make subjective and ideological policy choices seem as if the science dictates those choices. But science informs policy, it does not provide objective answers to policy questions. However, those who disagree with the climate policy choices favored by extremists are labeled with offensive terms like deniers.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute rejects climate policies that assume Americans and humans all over the world must sacrifice their quality of living, be guilted into radical life changes, and give up on improving their standard of living in the name of fighting climate change. Even if the United States no longer existed, there would be little to no meaningful impact on global temperatures. Therefore, the myriad of extreme policies are all costs and no gain.
Using the force of government to impose policies that severely hurt humans today, especially the poor, without any meaningful benefits is not just foolish but indefensible. And when such policies are advanced, the proponents of those policies should always be expected to explain how their policy choices would meaningfully affect global temperatures. When they are unable to provide answers, which will be the case, their policy choices should be quickly dismissed.
The best way to deal with any genuine climate concerns is to remove government obstacles that hinder innovation, reduce wealth, and undermine prosperity and opportunity. Economic liberty benefits Americans generally, and at the same time, it is also the world’s best climate policy. After all, the wealthiest and most prosperous nations are far more likely to develop solutions to such problems than other nations.
Featured Posts
Blog
Europe’s heat wave tragically demonstrates the need for air conditioning
Western European nations take a very different approach from the United States on many issues — immigration, defense, welfare, energy, health care, and more.
Blog
RCP8.5: Climate establishment officially retires extreme scenario (Part II)
Part I can be found here. Victim of its own success? Perhaps to save face or even boast of being right…
Blog
RCP8.5: Climate establishment officially retires extreme scenario (Part I)
Thanks to the scholarship, courage, and perseverance of a handful of independent researchers, notably Roger Pielke, Jr., Justin Ritchie, and Hadi…
Search Posts
Newsletter
Voter Fraud, Disability Law and Green Hypocrisy
Republican House Leader John Boehner (R-OH) calls for an end to federal support for leftist activist group ACORN. President Bush signs into law new amendments…
Newsletter
Horrible Mortgage Ideas, Environmental Non-Disasters and Defending Delaware’s Honor
Senators spar over a plan for the federal government to buy up “distressed” mortgages. The Capital Research Center releases the “Doom List,” a litany of…
Op-Eds
Five-Star Green Hypocrisy
Move over Al Gore. Swankier carbon charlatanism has come to town in the form of the World Wildlife Fund’s luxury getaway called "Around the World:…
Op-Eds
Putin’s Useful Idiots
In the latest issue of Foreign Policy William Yeatman explains how German environmentalists have helped Vladimir Putin fleece Europe.
Newsletter
Bailout Fallout, the New (Green) Deal and Scaring Parents with Toxic Arguments
The House and Senate agree on a $700 billion financial bailout bill. Environmentalists try to leverage the mortgage and Wall Street financial crisis to argue…
Citation
carbon credits in the bailout bill
Staff & Scholars
Sam Kazman
Counsel Emeritus
- Antitrust
- Automobiles and Roads
- Banking and Finance
Marlo Lewis, Jr.
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment
Ben Lieberman
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Consumer Freedom
- Energy
Jacob Tomasulo
Policy Analyst
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment
Kevin D. Williamson
Writer in Residence
- Climate
- Energy and Environment