Greta Thunberg represents a phenomenon within the environmentalist movement. The rising celebrity culture within the movement is alarming. Given the drastic consequences if we fail to curtail global inputs of plastic to our oceans, the diminishing bee population, and the rise of greenhouse gas emissions, relinquishing dissemination of information for these important topics to an irate, uninformed, sensationalist is a dangerous thing.
Greta has conducted numerous interviews in which her inability to answer basic questions eloquently revealed she doesn’t possess a meaningful grasp on the issues at hand. In spite of this, the leftist environmentalists have glorified her.
I’ve heard her speech placed in the same category as Martin Luther King Jr.’s. Her commentary on every topic imaginable is littering news feeds. Criticism of her is reprehensible.
Conversely, her detractors have become so enraged that even a picture of her eating lunch on a train sends them into an insatiable fury. It’s eerily reminiscent of Homer Simpson, after having become irritated with his son Bart, was angered at the sight of Bart happily eating an apple. This level of outrage isn’t mentally healthy.
A middle ground is that it’s fair to criticize her policies and misdirected outrage. If we do transition to a green economy, it will be in spite of the environmentalists. If I had a foolproof blueprint for transitioning to a green economy it would be the following:
I would recommend that the green parties around the world enlist George Costanza as a consultant. George would then go through their party platforms line by line, and recommend that they do the exact opposite of what they’re proposing.
A noteworthy difficulty of the environmentalist movement is that is largely pushed by people who seldom commit themselves to economic literacy. An Atmospheric scientist, a glaciologist, a meteorologist, an oceanographer, concludes that the Earth is warming and notice this trend in other fields, seldom have devoted much study to economics and yet they are asked for their proposals on solutions to this crisis.
Green-tech on the stock markets is volatile compared to market averages. When the DOW does well, then green tech does twice as well. When the DOW does poorly, then green tech does twice as poorly. When people have disposable income, they spend on things that are pricier in the short run, but cheaper in the long run, such as electric vehicles, or solar panels.
Electric vehicles are gaining a share of the automotive sector at a rate of 50%-60% per year, indicating market saturation in a short period. If socialist parties’ tax reforms are adhered to, this will all but be the death of this promising expansion. The growth will discontinue and people will remain with that which is familiar.
Elon Musk specifically designed his business model such that earlier models will fund the later models. The highest profitability is high-end (expensive) electric vehicles, were designed first, to fund the production of later (cheaper) vehicles. If the wealthiest are taxed at rates requested by leftists, then disposable income on items such as electric vehicles is non-existent and the growth of that product will be non-existent.
When Greta goes on about the fiction of eternal economic growth, then can’t answer basic questions about her movement, one can’t help but wonder whether the environmentalist movement will succeed in spite of itself.
Latest posts by Brandon Kirby (see all)
- Who Rigs Every Oscar Night? – Freedom Philosophy - January 15, 2020
- Iran: 5 Things You Need To Know – Freedom Philosophy - January 8, 2020
- Top 5 Predictions For 2030 – Freedom Philosophy - January 3, 2020