By Paul Homewood
h/t Robin Guenier
There have been determined efforts to use the coronavirus lockdown to force through left wing climate change measures.
The efforts fall into two categories, both utterly deceitful. The first is exemplified by this Guardian article:
The environmental changes wrought by the coronavirus were first visible from space. Then, as the disease and the lockdown spread, they could be sensed in the sky above our heads, the air in our lungs and even the ground beneath our feet.
While the human toll mounted horrendously from a single case in Wuhan to a global pandemic that has so far killed more than 88,000 people, nature, it seemed, was increasingly able to breathe more easily.
As motorways cleared and factories closed, dirty brown pollution belts shrunk over cities and industrial centres in country after country within days of lockdown. First China, then Italy, now the UK, Germany and dozens of other countries are experiencing temporary falls in carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide of as much as 40%, greatly improving air quality and reducing the risks of asthma, heart attacks and lung disease.
For many experts, it is a glimpse of what the world might look like without fossil fuels. But hopes that humanity could emerge from this horror into a healthier, cleaner world will depend not on the short-term impact of the virus, but on the long-term political decisions made about what follows.
After decades of relentlessly increasing pressure, the human footprint on the earth has suddenly lightened. Air traffic halved by mid-March compared with the same time last year. Last month, road traffic fell in the UK by more than 70%, to levels last seen when the Beatles were in shorts. With less human movement, the planet has literally calmed: seismologists report lower vibrations from “cultural noise” than before the pandemic.
To sum up, they are saying – look at how clean the environment is now. Why can’t we carry on living this way? It is presented as an either/or choice.
One of the problems at the moment is that we all seem to be living through some sort of phoney war, in the UK at least. The sun has been shining, some of us can work from home (like my daughter), and can therefore have a lie in every morning.
Others (like my son-in-law) are on paid leave. While many have lost their jobs or taken pay cuts, the public at large does not appear to have been hugely put out, other than being stuck at home for most of the day.
There is an eerie calm before the storm. But the reality building up behind the scenes is that massive economic damage and dislocation is already taking place, which could end up having a catastrophic effect on society as a whole.
But at the moment the shops are full of goods (even bog rolls up here), give or take a few items still being panic bought, and we can buy petrol. Buses are running, the hospitals are cracking on, government is still working, the police are on the streets(which makes a nice change!), we can still buy pretty much everything we need on Amazon, we can sit and watch TV, and on and on.
In short, our lives are little changed.
But how long can it stay that way?
As more and more factories close, whether because of the virus or financial pressure, goods are going to become more scarce. Sometimes this will directly impact shops, alternatively it could impact supply chains in other parts of the economy.
Reduced activity in the service sector may be less visible, but no less damaging. It is becoming increasingly difficult, for example, to get cars serviced or find a plumber.
And come summer, who will help with the harvest in lock down.
Ah, I hear you say, can’t we import everything we need from China? Ignoring the fact that the crisis has shown we are already far too reliant on China, how will we be able to pay for it?
In order to import goods, we need foreign currency, which we can only earn by exporting, something which becomes harder as swathes of the economy shut down.
As for the NHS, how will we pay for that when the economy is on the rocks?
There is a concept about “essential workers”, such as nurses, police and transport workers. The implication is that other activities are “non-essential”. It is a short step then to writing off the latter as frivolous. But who is to decide?
Leonard E Read, for instance, wrote about all the products, businesses and skills it takes to make just a single pencil:
the loggers; the suppliers of the heat, belt and motors for the waxing and drying; the men who poured concrete for the dam that provides the power; the transporters; the makers of the glue; the miners of the graphite; the crew of the ships that send the graphite to the factory; the workers at the rubber company who make the erasers and the people and ingredients which comprise erasers…the list goes on.
Or as Mike Rowe put it:
The same thing is true for all other products and businesses. We all work together in unison. None of us are an island unto ourselves. Every business relies on other businesses—accountants; attorneys; office supply stores; IT people; businesses who re-manufacture toner; businesses who wash windows and clean rugs; construction companies who build and fix things for companies; and many others.
You can’t just stop 90% of the cogs in the wheel and expect capitalism to survive.
If my daughter, as is her want, decides to have her nails painted, then why shouldn’t she? And why shouldn’t somebody set up a business to do it?
Eco activists may think this is a luxury that modern society cannot afford. But who is going to enforce it?
Will we end up with a command, war time style economy where government directs who should do which jobs and where?
The bottom line is that the UK economy cannot keep going like this for much longer without real suffering. For the Guardian to pretend that we can somehow carry on like this is a dangerous illusion.
The second strand in the eco playbook concerns money. If governments can fund coronavirus bailout, they must be able to afford Green New Deals and other far left programmes.
Steve Milloy has a list here of some who have argued for this, including:
Jeremy Corbyn has also been peddling the same falsehoods here.
What we need to remember is that the lockdown has already led to a loss of output, which cannot be replaced. The government’s £300bn+ bailout cannot alter this fact. All it can do is redistribute money around to mitigate suffering.
But sooner or later the bill must be made by the country as a whole.
This will be difficult enough as a one-off bailout. The idea that we could permanently run the economy in this fashion would be ruinous.
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
April 11, 2020 at 11:51AM
Iowa Climate Science Education 