Category: Business & Capitalism

Rolling Stone spots ‘global warming bubble’

Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi does a terrific job of exposing Goldman Sachs in his article “The Great American Bubble Machine.”

Particularly relevant here, Taibbi spotlights the “global warming bubble” as Goldman’s current pump-and-dump scheme. He’s not the first to write about this ongoing phenomena, but it is nice to see that Rolling Stone raises at least some questions about the rush to global warming.

I don’t believe Taibbi’s full article is available on the web yet, so you’ll have to get a hold of a print copy of Rolling Stone — it’s a very worthwhile read.

Is Obama laundering federal money to GE through Michigan?

General Electric is getting yet more taxpayer money, possibly laundered federal money, to subsidize its business.

A GE press release announced that the state of Michigan will provide GE with $60 million to build a $100 million “technology & software center” — what used to be known as an “office building.”

While the source of the Michigan subsidy could be Michigan taxpayers, given how strapped the state is from auto industry losses, it’s quite possible that the Obama administration is funneling U.S. taxpayer stimulus money through Michigan to GE.

Michigan’s budget problems are so severe, after all,  that the state has offered to house prisoners from California’s burgeoning prisons.

We reported in May that GE received $55 million in taxpayer subsidies to build a hybrid locomotive battery plant in New York.

You can almost hear GE CEO Jeff Immelt, who sits on President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, chanting to the President, “Give me the money.” In return, Immelt, the new corporate welfare queen, is helping Presdient Obama advance his global warming and health care agendas.

Scaredy-CAT: USCAP member switches on W-M

Energy & Environment News reports that heavy-equipment manufacturer Caterpillar now opposes Waxman-Markey:

“We cannot endorse this bill in its current form,” Caterpillar Chairman and CEO Jim Owens wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) yesterday. “Despite our efforts to improve portions of the bill, specific provisions relating to non-road equipment, black carbon, border measures and other critical issues remain problematic.”

Owens was a fool to ever think that global warming legislation would work for his company.

BTW, Greenpeace also now opposes W-M because it

…has been so heavily influenced by the coal and oil industries…

Greens not worried about weak climate bill…

… because, as reported in Carbon Control News this morning:

… they trust that their allies in Congress, including Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) who co-sponsored by the bill, and the White House will develop and implement the package in a way that is environmentally protective.

Any CEO that think he’s cut a deal on climate is in for a big surprise…

House GOP asks Justice to investigate GM, Chrysler for illegal lobbying on climate

Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-PA) asked Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether General Motors and Chrysler violated the law by using federal bailout money to lobby for climate legislation.

According to Sensenbrenner’s letter:

In recent months, General Motors (GM) and Chrysler have received tens of billions of federal dollars… Despite this massive influx of federal cash, both manufacturers have maintained at least some lobbying operations.

In addition to internal lobbying, both GM and Chrysler are members of the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP). USCAP is a group of businesses and environmental organizations that organized for the sole purpose of lobbying the federal government to enact climate legislation… USCAP is frequently credited with drafting portions of the Waxman-Markey climate proposal currently before the United States House of Representatives…

The Byrd Amendment prohibits the use of appropriated funds to lobby for any award of a federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement…

The appropriateness and legality of their continued lobbying and membership in USCAP is therefore questionable…

Rep. Joe Barton recently forced insurer AIG to drop out of USCAP for similar reasons.

Back to the future with Deutsche Bank

Deutsche Bank is helping the greens market global warming alarmism with this “carbon counter” near Madison Square Garden:

DBCC

You can even get a counter for your web site that looks like this:

DBwidget

But don’t be shocked and appalled that Deutsche Bank is helping the greens. The bank is no stranger to aiding and abetting oppression…

9780521803298-template.indd

Der Al Gore hat immer Recht!

Green lawsuit in California seen as warm-up for future climate litigation

Carbon Control News reports that two “environmental justice” groups (Communities for a Better Environment and California Communities Against Toxics) sued the state of California on June 10 alleging the state’s climate change program violates its 2006 global warming law. [Click here for the summary].

Carbon Control News rightly pointed out that the lawsuit

… could foreshadow similar legal challenges facing a federal GHG cap-and-trade program, because the California groups, who question the effectiveness of emissions trading, are also opposed to the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation.

The lesson here — especially for USCAP’s business members — is that while businesses may feel like they can deal with seemingly “mainstream” green groups (like USCAP’s Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council) in crafting a survivable climate bill, in the end the more extreme green groups will come along and try to scuttle the deal in favor of more extreme regulation.

Republicans may finally get it: Big business is the enemy

This memo from the Minority Staff of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee indicates that Republicans are finally starting to understand that big business is the enemy of taxpayers, consumers and, well, freedom itself, when global warming is concerned.

By themselves, Al Gore and the greens lack the credibility and the lobbyists to put the carbon choke-hold on our economy. But big business — like the members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership — are providing what the Gore-greens lack.

Moreover, USCAP members are doing their best to silence business lobby groups that should be leading the fight against global warming legislation like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable.

Corpocracy — a marriage of big business to government that is detrimental to consumers, taxpayers and freedom — is here.

Attention Wal-Mart Management: Clean-up on aisle ‘green’

Wal-Mart’s support for action on climate change has taken an ironic, but not unpredictable twist.

Last week, a California superior court judge overturned local approval of a Wal-Mart store because developers and officials failed to adequately consider the store’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report in Carbon Control News.

Click here for the ruling.

Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott admitted at last year’s Wall Street Journal ECO:nomics conference that his company had not done a cost-benefit analysis of its green advocacy efforts.

It’s starting to show.

John Norquist: ILUVCENTRALPLANNING

In an effort to play the “energy efficiency” card on opponents of oppression-via-CO2-regulation, former Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist concludes a piece entitled “Global Warming Skeptics Often Own Worst Enemy” with:

Is it a good idea to obsess on global warming as a threat to human life on earth? I don’t know, but as a supporter of free-market capitalism I do know that if we can produce the same or more wealth with less energy, we should do it. And if that also helps the environment, what’s the problem?

Norquist says he supports free-market capitalism yet he resorts to the collective — that is, “if we can produce the same or more wealth with less energy, we should do it.” Who is “we,” Mr. Norquist? The government? If so, count me out of we.

Has not the 20th century entirely debunked the concept of central planning? How many more people, Mr. Norquist, must suffer and/or die to prove the folly of central planning on a societal scale.

Certainly any capitalist can determine on his own and without the assistance of bureaucrats whether energy efficiency efforts make sense. As a sop to those with central planning inclinations, however, if we are going to do anything, why not act to make energy more available and more affordable, rather than act to make it less available and less affordable.

A few more points. The potential gains of energy efficiency on a societal basis have been way oversold and there is no reason to believe that will change any time soon.

Also, Mr. Norquist, perhaps you’ve heard about the problems with the compact fluorescent lightbulbs you seem to embrace? You know: they are expensive, provide inferior light, aren’t reliable, may be dangerous and are definitely a hassle if broken, come from China (as opposed to incandescent bulbs from Kentucky), pose quite a health risk to Chinese factory workers and, in all likelihood, provide no environmental benefits whatsoever.

As far as your penchant for smart growth, Mr. Norquist, you may want to live in a “compact” community, but count me and many Americans out. We like our spacious homes and yards, and the comfort, convenience and freedoms afforded by automobiles, cheap gas and roads. We don’t want our lives circumscribed and rationed by the pestilence that is meddlesome government.

Finally, how is anything that the green movement wants to do, particularly with respect to greenhouse gases, going to help the environment? I’ve worked on environmental issues for 20 years and have yet to be so enlightened. As far as I can tell, societal wealth is what makes for a clean environment. As the greens want to make us poorer, be assured that the quality of our environment will suffer if they succeed.

No stop signs. No speed limits. John Norquist would put us on the highway to:

Green Hell JACKET.indd

Stupid Banker of the Day: HSBC’s Kevin Bourne

European bank HSBC’s dalliance in the U.S. subprime bubble cost its shareholders more than $15 billion in losses. So you might think the bank would be wary of wandering into the next financial bubble — that is the green one. But once again, you would be wrong to apply common sense to today’s financial industry.

Reuters reports today that a large U.S. pension fund is interested in investing in companies in HSBC’s Climate Change Market Index. HSBC equities chief Kevin Bourne told Reuters,

“It doesn’t matter if investors believe in climate change or not, they know it’s a good investment category.”

Apparently, investing in companies that provide tangible value to society is so old-school. It seems to have  been replaced by getting in while the getting is good and getting out before the bubble bursts. But few, including HSBC, seem to have a good track record in that regard.

Bourne added,

“But investors are global and if they can’t find your company, they can’t lend their money to you. The tough question is how to let investors know that you’re involved in climate change.”

HSBC seems not to view its challenge as asking whether investing in dubious climate change schemes is appropriate so much as it is jumping over that due diligence question and onto figuring out how to find the next sucker.

Moving past HSBC’s investment bubble recidivism, there is the question of the unnamed pension fund willing to gamble its assets on climate change scams.

While Bourne would not name the pension fund, he did indicate to Reuters that it was among the four largest: either the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, California Public Employees Retirement System, State of New York Employees’ Retirement System, or the Florida Retirement System.

So the money going into HSBC ‘s green bubble is not that of some private, cowboy investment group; it’s the taxpayer money intended for California, New York or Florida public sector retirees.

Aside from the direct risk of investing in bubbles, there’s the innocent bystander effect. The ongoing subprime bubble-caused financial crisis has already cost state pension funds an estimated $1.3 trillion.The two California public employee retirement systems have so far lost a combined $110 billion — even though the two were never heavily invested in them in the first place. New York and Florida public employee funds have taken similar losses.

The problematic intersection of state pensions funds and global warming has been preliminarily explored in the report, “Pensions in Peril.”

Switching metaphors, maybe Kevin Bourne, HSBC and the rest of the fast-talking, but slow-witted Wall Street crowd ought to step back from, and reconsider pressing the handle that will cause the green vortex that will flush hard-earned taxayer and investor money down the toilet again.

When the green bubble bursts, will there be any money left to pay state retirees?

Bill O’Reilly spotlights climate corruption

The Free Enterprise Action Fund, managed by Green Hell author Steve Milloy and Tom Borelli, has been trying for four years to get Americans to pay attention to the government-corporate corruption involved in cap-and-trade legislation, particularly with respect to General Electric.

The story has gotten worse now that GE’s NBC unit has become essentially a PR firm for advancing the global warming agenda and, in the case of MSNBC, a cheerleader for President Obama.

Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly spotlighted the ugly story last night.

Check out this YouTube video of O’Reilly on with Glenn Beck.