Biodiversity megabollocks review
The UK government commissions a review of the economics of biodiversity, and it's a complete load of mystical loony balls
Eco-rentseeking.
They have their eyes on the prize: all of your money.
What green economics is, otherwise, is a mystical claim that the "economy is embedded in nature".
Is it?
Read this on one of the participants report on green economics. See if you can figure out what it's about.
The Dasgupta report can change economics - and the world
For too long traditional economics has completely ignored nature and the environment - to the detriment of both.
This is a religion, which seeks to inculcate itself in the minds children through the force of the state.
In spite of this, perhaps my favourite part of the Dasgupta Review Interim Report, isn’t the part which is directly connected to my professional life. It is the part that reflects that these technical, policy and political changes need support too.
The Interim Report highlights that our sustainable future relies upon individuals caring about and understanding nature, and issues a plea for “a transformation of our education systems towards one where children from an early age are encouraged to try and understand the infinitely beautiful tapestry of processes and forms that is Nature”. The report concludes that “it is only when we appreciate that we are part of Nature and that Nature nurtures us that we will have fewer needs for reviews on the economics of biodiversity”.
This doesn’t diminish the need to act on the Review now, but flags the importance of people and their preferences both in realising and maintaining a safe operating space for humanity in the biosphere.
The author wonders, "how different the world might be if the relationship between economies and nature [...] was in fact the foundation of all economics teaching around the world".
Then most people would be no more than serfs.
The Fen Beagle gets it. The Greenomics weirdos want to take us backwards.
The UK government DOES NOT get it. Here's the report they commissioned.
The report's introduction is exactly as I have said: mystical mumbo jumbo. In fact, human society has never been *less* dependent on nature. This is what green economists seek to reverse.
I do not rely on "nature" for food water and shelter.
I rely on Tesco, Thames Water and local builders.
"Nature" does not "regulate our climate". There is no mechanism of climatic regulation.
"Nature" does not "control disease". Nature is diseases. Horrible, painful, brutal diseases.
"Nature" does not "maintain nutrient cycles". They exist in the abstract by virtue of organisms existences.
"Nature" does not give me "spiritual fulfilment". I enjoy nature as leisure, not as worship.
The "opportunities for recreation" exist independently of "nature".
"Without nature there would be no life" is trite. "Nature" does not give life to life.
The religious nut believes nature to be a thing independent of things.
That's just the opening paragraph.
It's full of mystical bullshit.
"HM Treasury, the UK government’s economic and finance ministry, commissioned an independent, global review on the economics of biodiversity."
Will hmtreasury commission criticism of it? Why not?
The entire UK political establishment has been recruited into a cult. I'm not being dramatic. They want to change society, to remake in the image of their religion. They don't care what you think about that.
You think I'm joking?
It is a radical agenda for the reorganisation of society.
Where is he opposition to this stuff? Where is the criticism? Where is the debate? When is the vote?
This is a proposition for a radical, regressive reorganisation of society, deeper than anything proposed by Marx or Mao, and perhaps even Pol Pot.
But it is commissioned by @hmtreasury and is adored by bankers.
Do you get your spiritual values from the mountain?
Does the river give you water and take away diseases?
Does the beach give you food?
This is batshit stuff.
So much of this "report" is of this quality. It is an extremely shallow analysis.
Putting waste into landfill isolates it from "nature". And it's what "nature" has always done. That's what coal and oil and the white cliffs of Dover are.
We put fewer and fewer "pollutants" into waterways. The UK's rivers and coasts are cleaner than they have been for centuries. Not for reasons of environmentalism. We found alternative ways of doing things that were superior. We don't need mystical mumbo jumbo to do it.
The "biosphere" is perfectly capable of "polluting" itself. Hence the dramatic changes in the Earth geology and geography evidenced by the coal, oil, gas and white cliffs. The mystical view of nature fails to account for "nature" depreciating itself. It's a massive error.
I wish I had time or money to debunk the entire nonsense. hmtreasury does, but it's giving its money to religious lunatics, so that they can dress their superstitious nonsense up as science. There needs to be resistance and opposition to this stuff.