The Stinking Privilege of the Green New Deal
The Inflation Reduction Act is the Green New Deal Under Another Name.
Welcome to the lovely future they've planned for you.
A few years ago when I was building my house, I attended a "green" building conference in San Francisco. Gavin Newsom and Bobby Kennedy, Jr. were giving keynote addresses, and across the conference floor were strewn hundreds of booths of builders, engineers, architects, visionaries, and commercial interests selling every manner of material, equipment, skill sets, and propaganda. Buildings, I was told, emit 59 percent of carbon emissions, and green builders would shut that down. And it would be profitable.
At the time I was neutral but dubious. I had completed a "green" subdivision and had promised puzzlingly powerful members of โthe communityโ that I would build a "green" house. It wasnโt a requirement but it was an acceptable challenge and I knew I would be fascinated by the exercise.
I followed the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) platinum template, contracted the job myself. I wanted to build a healthy house, which meant as little chemical off-gassing as possible. Despite my savings, which were considerable, it still cost 40 percent more than a traditional stick-frame. The geothermal system cost $35,000 more than traditional heating and no, I have not โmade back that money.โ Today that cost would be north of $150,000.
We're all in this together, right?
The only reason I am not bankrupt is that where I live is so restricted as to land use, housing prices have skyrocketed. Only the rich can afford to live here. My property with its โimprovements,โ which is to say my money and labor, is now worth 30 times my initial investment. This is known as old-fashioned economics, wherein you restrict supply and prices, via demand, go up.
This too is a perfect micro-illustration of the โGreen Economyโ or the the "Green New Deal.โ It is "green" only for the wealthy or privileged by virtue of education. It is very, very "green" for those who profit from it. The people who took my extra money, other than the giant suction hose of government, were mostly those demanded by "green" theology: engineers (5), lawyers (3), surveyors (2), wildlife consultants (2), and permitting bureaucrats. Those requirements haveย doubled in the intervening years.
Today, life is very green for the hosts of eager young professionals at that conference who have in the intervening years insinuated themselves into every ย government structure, inserting siphons whereby they literally suck money out of the system in torrents of green. When I think of that conference, full of bright-eyed (expensively educated) enthusiasts, who were hell-bent on selling their ideas to the wider culture, I think: who the hell brought you up? Because this is a moral question, a profoundly ethical question. And everything you do is profoundly immoral.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected an appeal that would overturn the econometrics of carbon pricing, i.e. that the Biden administration is placing too high an estimate on the future social cost of carbon emissions. Who can know the social cost of carbon emissions? But it means shuttering 450,000 shale jobs because think of the future.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to take up a fight by Republican-led states over the federal government's method of estimating the costs of climate change, in a win for President Joe Biden's push to address rising emissions.ย In a short, unexplained order, the justices rejected a challenge led by Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R) to the Biden administration's use of interim formulas that calculate the societal costs of greenhouse gas emissions.
In a statement, Bailey vowed to "continue to combat government overreach at every turn.โย Missouri, he said, "was the first state to challenge the Biden administrationโs flawed social cost of greenhouse gases model that seeks to cripple American businesses in the name of a radical climate agenda."
Here's the macro-illustration. When the Liberal Party in Canada took power, our federal budget was in surplus at $1.9 billion and our debt was $612 Billion. Eight years later our budget deficit is $42 billion (down from $90 billion the year before). Our debt has doubled to $1.2 trillion federally and double that again when you add in provincial debt.ย The only promise Justin Trudeau has kept is the road to net-zero, which has cost more than $100 billion. Federally. Double that for the provinces. Drawing down carbon emissions has moved us from surplus into massive debt.
All that money went to one class, which is to say that group of educated professionals who now act as the climate police in every sector of the economy, including $207 million to teachers at every level of the school system. Think of them as Soviet apparatchiks, hunting apostates and maneuvering for preference. They are the ten percent required to keep the 90 percent in line, in service of the 1 percent.
Cui bono? Do you have to ask?
Carbon taxes were meant to be revenue-neutral in that money was to be returned to the less fortunate. This, of course, turned out to be fiction. Carbon taxes are levied all along the supply chain, and this, added to fiscal insanity, has skyrocketed prices for basic necessities. We are told food prices rose 7 percent. Itโs more like 75 percent in the real world.
The following, courtesy of economist Peter St. Onge, is what happened to the rest of us:
The common thread is "how the hell are Canadians surviving between inflation and taxes, barely enough to live on." Whatโs left is soaked up in soaring rents. And donโt even think of buying a house โ the Canadian housing bubble is truly epic, since 2008, home prices and household debt have almost quadrupled. In Vancouver they are up almost five times. Twice whatโs happened in the U.S. Canadian house prices compared to income are now over twice what they are in the U.S. and Canadians household debt is the highest in the G7, over 100 percent of income, 30 percent higher than the U.S.
If a Canadian bought a house now, the mortgage would cost 48 percent of pre-tax income. In Vancouver and Toronto, itโs closer to 70 percent. Nation-wide, including rural areas, the average house price is $500K US. Keep in mind Canada is much poorer than America, if Canada were a state, it would be poorer than West Virginia or Mississippi. So imagine a half-million dollar house in West Virginia with New York City taxes. Rents across Canada have soared by 20 percent in the last two years. In B.C. and Ontario 30 percent. Forty percent of the Canadian middle class cannot make every day expenses. One in ten are borrowing from friends and family."
The cruelty of "green" is unfathomable.
Please consider a very cheap annual subscription. I am so so grateful for the paid (and other subscriptions) over the past month. And messages from subscribers who pay are so encouraging, so uplifting, I find myself too abashed to reply my thanks, so herewith, you are the wind beneath my wings, and sometime cliches say the necessary better than anything.
Elizabeth Nickson was trained as a reporter at the London bureau of Time Magazine. She became European Bureau Chief of LIFE magazine in its last years of monthly publication, and during that time, acquired the rights to Nelson Mandelaโs memoir before he was released from Robben Island. She went on to write for Harperโs Magazine, the Guardian, the Observer, the Independent, the Sunday Telegraph, the Sunday Times Magazine, the Telegraph, the Globe and Mail and the National Post. Her first book The Monkey Puzzle Tree was an investigation of the CIA MKULTRA mind control program and was published by Bloomsbury and Knopf Canada. Her next book, Eco-Fascists, How Radical Environmentalists Are Destroying Our Natural Heritage, was a look at how environmentalism, badly practiced, is destroying the rural economy and rural culture in the U.S. and all over the world. It was published by Adam Bellow at Harper Collins US. You can subscribe to her Substack at elizabethnickson.substack.com/
Article tags: Canada, carbon emissions, cost of living, green building, green economy, Green New Deal, Liberal Party, net-zero
What a joy it is to read such well-constructed, well-researched and invariably interesting essays on issues which really matter. If more bloggers had your kind of journalistic credentials and winning way with words and ideas, Substack would be even more alluring. I only wish I had discovered your peerless work earlier. Thank you.
Very important piece, Elizabeth. "The cruelty of "green" is unfathomable." Very true.
This practicing mechanical engineer is completely embarrassed by anyone else in this profession who endorses 'green' because the physics simply tell a different story. None of it actually works. They are all getting paid by taxpayers. The cost/benefit ratio equals INFINITY. It is all a farce and here in MN, the solar fields to nowhere are going to leach toxic cadmium onto our most fertile soil. Insanity.
Feeding communist China is all this crap is.