If only France had air conditioning is not way to look at it.

January 10, 2022
By Rachel Frazin

Top US weather, climate disasters killed nearly 700 last year: NOAA (click here)

Last year, 688 people were killed in 20 major weather and climate disasters in the U.S., according to new data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

These 20 events cost a total of $145 billion, with each costing more than $1 billion. They included one drought, two floods, two hurricanes, a wildfire event and a winter storm.

The NOAA has been measuring such disasters since 1980 and has seen an average of 7.4 events per year since then, adjusted to the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Deaths from these CPI-adjusted events have also increased in recent years. There has been an average of 361 deaths each year from billion-dollar storms overall since 1980, but an average of 904 per year over the past five years.

The figures raised concerns from climate advocates, who said they are evidence of climate change’s increasing death toll...

Besides the climate deaths in the USA just this year, all that stands between Earth’s resolve to heat and life, is a power failure. How many Americans would die in rotating brown outs?

What is occurring in Europe is not exclusive to them.

Evidently, legislators like Manchin don’t care about life either domestic or international, just ideology and profits.

People like Machin have outlived their relevancy.

It is all about coal. All those that refuse to accept their planet's future are all entrenched in coal states, West Virginia and Kentucky have the most irrelevant legislators in the US Congress. They have such strong ideologies to remain irrelevant they export "coal death" to other countries. While China and the USA have agreements about the climate crisis, these legislators ignore, deny and ridicule the very reason the USA advocates China's movement to alternative energies.

July 19, 2022
By Donald F. Kettl

When the Supreme Court (click here) issued its divisive environmental policy decision, West Virginia v. EPA, at the end of its last session, conservatives applauded that the Environmental Protection Agency “can no longer sidestep Congress to exercise broad regulatory power,” as West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey put it. The decision shut down what the Heritage Foundation’s Derrick Morgan called a “power grab” by EPA.

For the Biden administration, it was “another devastating decision that aims to take our country backwards,” the president charged. The outgunned liberal minority on the court said that the ruling had stripped EPA’s power “to respond to ‘the most pressing environmental challenge of our time.’ ”...

Climate Change Policies (click here) - Will you survive in the state where you live?

Least-healthy States: Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming

Any particular color come to mind when looking at those states? Any degree of impoverishment come to mind when thinking about those states? Welcome to the irrelevancy of the Republican agenda. No wonder they want to take the country by another civil war.

Republicans do not care about life, they seek ideology that suits their purpose. Law breaking, corruption and lies are all foundation allowances for the irrelevant right wing. 

Recently, McConnell and what's his name...Oh, yeah, Rand Paul had an argument over an anti-abortion judge used as a bargaining chip to be placed by Biden in a federal seat. Evidently, McConnell obstructed the bargaining chip judicial placement. 

A couple of things. It is interesting to realize Rand Paul, an eye doctor, doesn't trust women. What is more interesting McConnell pulled the stunt because it would temper the harsh appearance of Republicans. That is why the gun legislation passed, so they could say they care about current issues even though they don't trust women to make decisions. The obstruction of Paul's ambitions was another move to get Republicans elected when they obviously shouldn't be.

Libertarians on climate. Rand Paul for all protestations with every bill presented in Congress really doesn't care about personal liberties, except for guns. He always changes his mind anyway, except for guns, and votes with Republicans.

Libertarianism, Climate Change and Individual Responsibility

by Olle Torpman 

Res Publica 28, 125-148 (20220

Much has been written about climate change (click here) from an ethical view in general, but less has been written about it from a libertarian point of view in particular. In this paper, I apply the libertarian moral theory to the problem of climate change. I focus on libertarianism’s implications for our individual emissions. I argue that (i) even if our individual emissions cause no harm to others, these emissions cross other people’s boundaries, (ii) although the boundary-crossings that are due to our ‘subsistence emissions’ are implicitly consented to by others, there is no such consent to our ‘non-subsistence emissions’, and (iii) there is no independent justification for these emissions. Although offsetting would provide such a justification, most emitters do not offset their non-subsistence emissions. Therefore, these emissions violate people’s rights, which means that they are impermissible according to libertarianism’s non-aggression principle.

Libertarians believe in personal liberty and responsibilities:

My philosophy (click here) as a Libertarian is carried on several key fundamentals: the non-aggression principle, private property rights, self-ownership, and the belief that liberty is the best way to enable individual human flourishing. Reproductive rights fall into that in multiple aspects: nobody else has the right to decide if, when and how you become a parent. Nobody else has the right to impose upon your property or your body without your informed, ongoing and unambiguous consent. 

Abortion is just one aspect of reproductive rights: this applies to contraception, IVF, surrogacy, adoption, sterilization, birth methods and the termination of a pregnancy. Individuals should be making these choices for themselves, not looking to the government to impose the decisions of others. None of us has the right to decide for someone else making this profoundly personal choice. We can see what government prohibitions do on countless other topics — we can also look to other countries and see what these prohibitions do to civil liberties. We know better than to use the force of government here. 

I’m “pro-choice”, but I’m also “pro-quality-of-life”: to enable individual human flourishing, it’s essential that we determine our own destinies — including if, when, and how we bring life into being. Through that, we can enable a world in which every parent is willing, every child is wanted, and all of us are free.

Conservatives have choices outside the corrupt, violent and insurgent Republican Party, unfortunately, the Libertarians are disenfranchised from being relevant. That is unfortunate because they are completely relevant in today's world.

I think it is strange that an entire party with a significant following of Americans rarely see an election victory. Libertarians are free, not insurgent.