I came across an obscure American publication called 'Investors Business Daily',which ran an article called “Going Green A Luxury For Rich At Expense Of Poor”. This article claimed that while “socialism (had been) the opium of the liberal intelligentsia” the “drug of choice” for these elitists is now “environmentalism”. The “dirty little secret” of the modern green movement has become a “luxury good for he uber-rich”, who espouse all sorts of policies from carbon taxes, to renewables, to closing down coal plants – thereby imposing high costs on poor people who can least afford to pick up the “green tab”.

The article cited an oil pipeline that would have created 5,000 jobs for $70,000 pa workers that was opposed by Democrats on more that $100,000 a year. 51% of these people had PH.Ds.

These elites thought that the pipeline would inevitably be blocked; they also thought that it was inevitable that Hilary Clinton would be elected president. But, along came Donald Trump, and the pipeline plus another one has been given the go ahead.

The sorts of things that you think are inevitable just might not be anything of the kind.

Thanx to everyone who has posted links to support their viewpoint. I'm sure that the readers who want to learn more about this topic will appreciate that.

I note, with some sadness, that those who agree with the premise of the topic tend to post supporting links. Would people of the contrary view please do likewise so that all readers can be better able to form their own conclusions. Otherwise, they may perceive a paucity of depth in those comments and may even dismiss them.

ttbn, here's an article that reveals a windfall (excuse the pun) for communities that have invested in wind turbines in Australia, contrary your quote that environmentalism is a “dirty little secret” of the modern green movement that has become a “luxury good for he uber-rich”: https://reneweconomy.com.au/wind-farms-on-track-to-deliver-10-5bn-back-to-host-communities-86989/

I particularly like the final paragraph, "In terms of jobs, the report finds that the 2GW of new wind farm capacity currently under construction have created an estimated 1,950 in direct local jobs and a further 4,500 indirect jobs in local businesses that supply to the projects." Sound like a win from wind to me. :-)

Gee that's great GJOESQ. Just one problem.

Remember the statistic from Spain, when it was the poster boy for alternate generation, before it sent them broke.

Yes, they found that for every job generated in expensive subsidised alternate power, they lost 2 from the real self supporting economy.

Great for those communities, if it is true, but those 1,950 in direct local jobs and a further 4,500 indirect jobs have cost about 9000 in the real world.

Any idea how many have been lost just in the car industry?

So the one question that will remain unanswered is, where will the jobs come from for those lost.

Hasbeen,

Now you're talking history, mate; and to someone like GJOESQ that only goes back to breakfast this morning. Still, after we have carked it, he and his little friends are going to have to clear up the mess they are getting themselves into. Not our problem.