Dirt People Want to Tax Babies

December 11, 2007

 

The beautiful thing about the radical environmentalists is the more they talk the clearer their true agenda becomes.  I’ve been criticized in the past for suggesting that the real aim of those at the heart of the global warming movement is population control.  That’s certainly not to say that everyone who has been hoodwinked by the Branch Algorians subscribes to this agenda but it certainly is a driving factor in the movement. 

 

The theory of an unsustainable planet dates back many years but really took flight with doomsayer Paul Ehrlich and his book, The Population Bomb.  That little jewel of science fiction was written in 1968.  In it Ehrlich predicted, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.  In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.  At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…”  Of course, he was completely wrong.  In fact, we made great strides in ending world hunger.  The starvation in Africa that we’ve witnessed over the years is largely the result of politics.  War lords and dictators use food as a weapon.  Aside from inflicted hunger, the food per capita level is the highest in history.

 

Ehrlich proposed mandatory limits on childbirth, much like they have in China, as a means of saving the planet.  “The mother of the year should be a sterilized woman with two adopted children,” Ehrlich is quoted as saying.  Back when his book first hit the shelves in 1968, Ehrlich was also predicting a climate catastrophe caused by excessive greenhouse gases.  “I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000,” Ehrlich said back then.  The big worry in 1968 was global cooling.  Of course, that never came to pass.

 

That doesn’t stop the modern-day Ehrlichs from continuing to gin up hysteria.  A proposal this week in the Medical Journal of Australia calls for a ‘Baby Levy,’ a carbon tax on having children.  “Every newborn baby in Australia represents a potent source of greenhouse gas emissions for an average of 80 years, not simply by breathing, but by the profligate consumption of resources typical of our society,” wrote Barry Walters, clinical associate professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia.

 

According the CNSNews, “He (Walters) calculated that a birth levy of around $4,380 would cover the cost of purchasing the land needed and planting the trees required to offset one lifetime's worth of CO2. An additional annual tax of $350-$700 would cover maintenance of the forest.”  Again and again we see a pattern of wealth redistribution.

 

Oddly enough, Australia is not even close to having a population problem.  By comparison, it is 110 times the size of Ireland with about half the population.  In fact, were it not for migration, the population would be declining since native-born Australian reproduction is about half what it was in 1961.

 

This is how insane this global warming movement has become.  Has Mr. Walters ever stopped to think that those children he has proposed preventing from being born might grow up to invent some miraculous alternative form of energy?  Probably not.  He, like many of the other radical environmentalists, sees humans as the problem; the anti-nature.  Instead of being an integral part of our planet, these people see humans as a cancer. 

 

Left to their own devices, this is what the radical dirt people would impose upon us.  That they would turn to China as a model for how to run a society should tell you volumes.