American Politics

GlobaCommunists Make Case For Worldwide “Redistribution” For “Sustainability” #Trump #news

Bad news, humans. Globacommunists have hatched a new plan to force you to become vegan while stealing from you to give to those who didn’t earn it.

What’s a “globacommunist”, you may be asking?

In short, it’s a term used to describe Communists who wish to take over the entire world and rule it under an iron fist while they “redistribute” (steal) resources, cash, and food to send to people who have done nothing to earn it, so everyone can be “equal”. This of course flies in the face of how humans think, act, and are encoded in their DNA to survive.

These globacommunists preach sustainability, global warming, climate change, try to guilt trip people for eating meat, want you to believe there’s more than 2 genders, that Islam is peaceful, and if you don’t believe them and go along with them, they’re going to call you racist. You know the gig.

Trending: State By State – How Illegal Aliens Are Stealing America’s Future #IllegalAlien #immigration #politics #Trump #DeportThemAll

So here we go. These folks want everyone to live exactly the same, so everyone can have “the good life” while singing kumbaya and living at one with nature.

According to their “research”, if present trends continue, there will be no way for both of these things to happen at the same time.

That’s the bleak assessment of researchers from the Sustainability Research Institute at University of Leeds in England and the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change in Berlin.

The moonbats came to this conclusion after considering 11 necessary ingredients of a well-lived existence.

Some of the items on their list are basic human needs — income of at least $1.90 per day, electricity, enough food to eat and a life expectancy of at least 65 years. Others were cultural marxist goals, such as “equality” (suppression of the majority), and the obvious, dependable friends and family, and a decent degree of life satisfaction (at least 6.5 on a scale of 1 to 10).

The researchers also considered the cost to the planet of achieving these things.

They broke it down into seven categories such as the bogeyman of globacommunists, “carbon dioxide emissions” and of course the use of natural resources like nitrogen, phosphorus and clean water.

What they believe is that humanity has a lot of work to do.

Right now, there’s not a single country on Earth that provides its people a good, sustainable life according to the globacommunist “researchers”.

Not one.

In fact, there aren’t even any that come close, according to the researchers, led by communist economist Daniel O’Neill of the University of Leeds.

Let’s start with the good life.

Out of roughly 150 countries studied, only three — Austria, Germany and the Netherlands — currently provide their citizens with all 11 items on the list. An additional seven — Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Japan and Sweden — offer 10 out of 11. The United States achieves nine, as does Canada.

But none of them is close to doing so sustainably. Indeed, none of them meets more than two of the seven requirements set out for environmental sustainability.

What is not mentioned is NOTHING is sustainable as long as we’re harvesting resources on Earth, highlighting the necessity for technological research to bring about mining of the solar system.

By globacommunist standards, the United States doesn’t meet any of them — and misses some “by a wide margin,” O’Neill said. America’s per-capita CO2 emissions are 13 times higher than the sustainable level, its phosphorus use is eight times higher and its nitrogen use is seven times higher. As if that’s not bad enough, its ecological and material footprints are both four times above sustainable levels.

At the other end of the spectrum are 35 countries where life is pretty miserable. Of the 11 necessities for a good life, these countries provided either none or just one.

Ironically, and perhaps contradictory to the rest of their claims, the researchers say the more socialist benefits available in a country, the more likely that country is living beyond its environmental means. The reverse is true as well — countries that operate sustainably tend to offer fewer socialist benefits.

Perhaps the country that strikes the best balance is Vietnam, the researchers said. Though it meets only six of 11 social goals, it meets every sustainability goal but one. Vietnam’s sole environmental transgression is that it emits too much carbon dioxide to keep the planet from warming by more than 2 degrees Celsius, the goal set forth in the Paris Agreement.

By the same measures, the country with the worst balance is Swaziland. This nation is as environmentally unsustainable as China, South Korea and the United Kingdom, missing five out of seven goals. And yet, despite using so many natural resources, it fails to give its citizens even one of the 11 necessary components of a good life, the researchers found.

All around the world, countries are doing a pretty poor job of living sustainably. Two-thirds of them emit too much CO2, and more than half use too much nitrogen and phosphorus. In addition, 56% of countries are using their land in an unsustainable way. That’s what constant warfare over long held grudges will do. Need we mention the Middle East or Africa?

Only 16 countries in the analysis met all seven environmental goals of the globacommunist cabal.

Although the overall picture may look grim to those believing the propaganda, the researchers working on behalf of globacommunism saw some signs hopeful for them, and their minions.. For example, there were a few countries that managed to score well for education and life satisfaction while keeping their CO2 emissions way below the global median level (that is, the point at which half the countries were emitting more and half were emitting less).

This discovery “demonstrates that much more carbon-efficient provisioning systems are possible,” O’Neill and his colleagues wrote as they babble about a greenhouse gas that isn’t a greenhouse gas.

Likewise, the rigged data suggests that the nutrition, income, sanitation and electricity needs of each and every person on Earth could be met “without significantly exceeding planetary boundaries” for sustainability, they wrote.

Remember, “sustainability” is globacommunist lingo for taxing everyone into poverty, and redistribute resources where they feel it should be, much like the failed Soviet Union and Communist China attempted, leading to mass famines and deaths of millions upon millions.

If someone could wave a magic wand and reallocate Earth’s resources so that they were shared equally by everyone, it would probably be enough to meet everyone’s basic human needs (the list that includes enough food to eat and enough money to avoid extreme poverty, among other things), O’Neill said.

But it still wouldn’t allow everyone to enjoy “more aspirational goals like secondary education and high life satisfaction,” he added. For that, “we need to become two to six times more efficient at transforming resource use into human well-being.”

Talk about living in La La Land. First, not everyone wants to go to college. Second, not everyone is intelligent enough to go to college. Thirdly, until colleges start teaching market skills and drop the brainwashing agenda, people are far better off avoiding college until they get their priorities straight.

That’s much easier said than done, of course. And it gets only more difficult when you consider that there will be 11.2 billion people on the planet by the end of the century, according to projections from the United Nations

Of course, these globacommunists want everyone to go Vegan, and forget the fact that humans are OMNIVORES and REQUIRE the enzymes, proteins, and other chemicals in meat.

As well, they claim that straightforward first steps include “switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy, producing products with longer lifetimes, reducing unnecessary waste, shifting from animal to crop products, and investing in new technologies,” the researchers wrote.

Except they (as always) fail to mention that “renewable energy” sources expend more energy being manufactured, than they ever create in their operational lifespan. “Renewable energy”, while a laudible goal, is currently a net-energy and resource LOSS, and worse for the planet than coal-fired power plants.

In a pitch to convince everyone of the “wonders of communism”, O’Neill said, in a future world “with very different social arrangements or technologies,” there could be a different equation for converting natural resources into human well-being that allows everyone to enjoy all aspects of the good life.

“Is this realistic?” he said. “I hope so, because the alternative could be environmental catastrophe.”

The study was published in the global warming preaching journal Nature Sustainability.


Mr Americana, Overpasses News Desk
February 6th, 2018


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.