What's Next: A Breathing Tax?
JBS | March 14, 2007
This recent New York Times editorial complained: "Right now, everyone is using the atmosphere like a municipal dump, depositing carbon dioxide free." Of course, the assertion that we owe something for the right to put carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is based on the myth of human-caused global warming.
Here is the undeniable scientific truth: Carbon dioxide is to a plant what oxygen is to an animal. More carbon dioxide means that plants grow better and faster. When plants grow better and faster, the total amount of plant matter increases. Increases in the amount of plant matter cause more consumption of carbon dioxide. More consumption of carbon dioxide lowers the level of carbon dioxide.
In contrast to this basic science, governments throughout the world fund and support junk science to rationalize their increase in power by convincing people that they are in danger, and that they can only be saved by letting them take control. Globalists imagine and invent problems and then they offer us the solution, but the solution is always more government and less sovereignty.
More and more people are beginning to see through the deception, and are asking some very important questions. For example, Robert Tracinski delivered a devastating analysis of this ludicrous and draconian proposal in a recent online commentary, wherein he observed:
The Times editors suggested that the government "start charging for the privilege" by imposing a "carbon tax."
We all knew it would eventually come to this: the New York Times thinks the government should tax us for breathing.
Of course, the editorial was supposed to be aimed at big corporations who build coal-fired power plants--but why should the logic stop there? Right now, eight million people are walking around on the streets of New York City heedlessly inhaling precious oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide, treating the skies over their fair city "like a municipal dump, depositing carbon dioxide free." Shouldn't they be forced to pay for the "privilege," too?
After all, further observed Tracinski, breathing is every much a process of putting carbon dioxide into the air as is any coal-fired power plant: "Our lungs take in oxygen and emit carbon dioxide so that they can provide the energy our cells use to keep us alive and to allow us to move, to grow, to thrive. Ditto for the power plants."
Tracinski then got to the heart of the matter:
What would you say if someone told you that he was concerned you might get sick because it's hot and humid out--and then told you that his "cure" was to constrict your supply of oxygen by 80%? Would you believe that he was sincerely concerned with your health? Well, you had better start asking the same question of Al Gore and the rest of the global warming fanatics, because that's exactly what they're trying to do. In denouncing fossil fuels, they are seeking to tax, reduce, and ultimately to eliminate the fuels that provide our civilization with 80% of its energy. Their goal is a fatal constriction of the process of industrial respiration.
That is the deepest, fullest reason why a "carbon tax" is just as dangerous as a tax on breathing.
Before the eco-fanatics and the power-hungry socialists choke the life out of modern industrialized civilization, Americans would do well to further educate themselves why scientific evidence is not on the side of the theory of human-caused warming.
A good start would be to watch The Great Global Warming Swindle.