

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A recent Bloomberg View (2/24/14) headline reads, "Profit From Global Warming or Get Left Behind." In his new book, WINDFALL (New York: Penguin, 2014), veteran journalist McKenzie Funk traveled the globe for six years, following the money in twenty-four countries to profile "hundreds of people who felt climate change would make them rich."
In a separate interview, Funk notes that "on Wall Street you no longer get a lot of climate denial." Largely indifferent to the causes of climate change, his respondents decided early on that investing in green technology was a losing proposition. Instead "the warmer the world, the less habitable it became, the bigger the windfall."
In 2008, Royal Dutch Shell developed two sophisticated climate-risk scenarios called Blueprints and Scramble. The first modeled a greener future while the latter predicted - due to government inaction - a future of droughts, floods, heat waves and super storms. By 2012, Shell executives confided to Funk "We've gone to Scramble. This is a Scramble kind of world. This is what we're doing." Another Shell official opined "I will be one of those persons cheering for an endless summer in Alaska."
The author's message is that in the short term, there will be definite winners and losers because ecological catastrophe is "...not necessarily a financial catastrophe for everyone." And while readers of this newspaper will temporarily avoid the most dire consequences of globing warming, upwards of one billion other human beings won't be spared.
During this interim period, the phrase 'a rising tide will lift all yachts' is more than a metaphor:
Funk is curiously nonjudgmental about his interview subjects, preferring to view them as good people "according to their own belief system," who only act out of perceived self-interest. He allows that "We can't trust capitalism to fix this" but asserts there's "nothing fundamentally wrong with profiting from disaster" and frets that readers might unfairly vilify businessmen.
In one narrow sense he's correct in that the system's internal but fatally flawed logic is responsible. Any CEO who allowed climate justice considerations to enter his or her decisions would quickly be replaced by someone more attuned to the bottom line.
In an earlier opinion piece, I characterized many otherwise caring folks who truly worry about the earth's survival as "capitalism deniers" because of their unwillingness to utter the "C" word. This, despite the fact that blame for environmental degradation lies squarely with our growth-and-profit-at-any-cost economic system. The system's apologists exist within and outside government and they will never be the solution.
The rest of us must draw the obvious conclusions and act accordingly within the tenuous time frame that remains.
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |

A recent Bloomberg View (2/24/14) headline reads, "Profit From Global Warming or Get Left Behind." In his new book, WINDFALL (New York: Penguin, 2014), veteran journalist McKenzie Funk traveled the globe for six years, following the money in twenty-four countries to profile "hundreds of people who felt climate change would make them rich."
In a separate interview, Funk notes that "on Wall Street you no longer get a lot of climate denial." Largely indifferent to the causes of climate change, his respondents decided early on that investing in green technology was a losing proposition. Instead "the warmer the world, the less habitable it became, the bigger the windfall."
In 2008, Royal Dutch Shell developed two sophisticated climate-risk scenarios called Blueprints and Scramble. The first modeled a greener future while the latter predicted - due to government inaction - a future of droughts, floods, heat waves and super storms. By 2012, Shell executives confided to Funk "We've gone to Scramble. This is a Scramble kind of world. This is what we're doing." Another Shell official opined "I will be one of those persons cheering for an endless summer in Alaska."
The author's message is that in the short term, there will be definite winners and losers because ecological catastrophe is "...not necessarily a financial catastrophe for everyone." And while readers of this newspaper will temporarily avoid the most dire consequences of globing warming, upwards of one billion other human beings won't be spared.
During this interim period, the phrase 'a rising tide will lift all yachts' is more than a metaphor:
Funk is curiously nonjudgmental about his interview subjects, preferring to view them as good people "according to their own belief system," who only act out of perceived self-interest. He allows that "We can't trust capitalism to fix this" but asserts there's "nothing fundamentally wrong with profiting from disaster" and frets that readers might unfairly vilify businessmen.
In one narrow sense he's correct in that the system's internal but fatally flawed logic is responsible. Any CEO who allowed climate justice considerations to enter his or her decisions would quickly be replaced by someone more attuned to the bottom line.
In an earlier opinion piece, I characterized many otherwise caring folks who truly worry about the earth's survival as "capitalism deniers" because of their unwillingness to utter the "C" word. This, despite the fact that blame for environmental degradation lies squarely with our growth-and-profit-at-any-cost economic system. The system's apologists exist within and outside government and they will never be the solution.
The rest of us must draw the obvious conclusions and act accordingly within the tenuous time frame that remains.

A recent Bloomberg View (2/24/14) headline reads, "Profit From Global Warming or Get Left Behind." In his new book, WINDFALL (New York: Penguin, 2014), veteran journalist McKenzie Funk traveled the globe for six years, following the money in twenty-four countries to profile "hundreds of people who felt climate change would make them rich."
In a separate interview, Funk notes that "on Wall Street you no longer get a lot of climate denial." Largely indifferent to the causes of climate change, his respondents decided early on that investing in green technology was a losing proposition. Instead "the warmer the world, the less habitable it became, the bigger the windfall."
In 2008, Royal Dutch Shell developed two sophisticated climate-risk scenarios called Blueprints and Scramble. The first modeled a greener future while the latter predicted - due to government inaction - a future of droughts, floods, heat waves and super storms. By 2012, Shell executives confided to Funk "We've gone to Scramble. This is a Scramble kind of world. This is what we're doing." Another Shell official opined "I will be one of those persons cheering for an endless summer in Alaska."
The author's message is that in the short term, there will be definite winners and losers because ecological catastrophe is "...not necessarily a financial catastrophe for everyone." And while readers of this newspaper will temporarily avoid the most dire consequences of globing warming, upwards of one billion other human beings won't be spared.
During this interim period, the phrase 'a rising tide will lift all yachts' is more than a metaphor:
Funk is curiously nonjudgmental about his interview subjects, preferring to view them as good people "according to their own belief system," who only act out of perceived self-interest. He allows that "We can't trust capitalism to fix this" but asserts there's "nothing fundamentally wrong with profiting from disaster" and frets that readers might unfairly vilify businessmen.
In one narrow sense he's correct in that the system's internal but fatally flawed logic is responsible. Any CEO who allowed climate justice considerations to enter his or her decisions would quickly be replaced by someone more attuned to the bottom line.
In an earlier opinion piece, I characterized many otherwise caring folks who truly worry about the earth's survival as "capitalism deniers" because of their unwillingness to utter the "C" word. This, despite the fact that blame for environmental degradation lies squarely with our growth-and-profit-at-any-cost economic system. The system's apologists exist within and outside government and they will never be the solution.
The rest of us must draw the obvious conclusions and act accordingly within the tenuous time frame that remains.