One of the latest Executive Orders (EOs) by President Obama (Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change) is a great example of the philosophy of “there is no way back.” In financial terminology the practice is called “doubling down.” Barring some rare occasion, it nearly always leads to total financial ruin. Many investors have learned that lesson the hard way. Don’t expect a different outcome in this case.
That definition alone is so encompassing that it could apply to almost anything, especially when coupled with faulty science or incorrect interpretation of scientific information. For example, the whole carbon dioxide (CO2) greenhouse gas theory is nothing but
a theory and it is unable to withstand scientific scrutiny.
In fact, the entire low energy radiation (mostly infrared) radiated out from the earth’s surface and ABSORBABLE by CO2 in the atmosphere is taken up (or consumed) by the CO2 in the first 200 m (approximately 500 feet) of air above ground. Consequently, neither adding to nor removing any of the CO2 above that elevation will make any difference to the climate.
Why having a Legislature?
Democratic western countries have three branches of government: (i) a legislative body, such as the U.S. Congress, (ii) the executive branch lead by the President and departmental Secretaries and (iii) an enforcement branch, commonly known as police. Exact terminologies and other minor details vary between the countries, but basically the three-branch division of state power is the same everywhere.
In exceptional circumstances, such as war or imminent danger of being attacked, the executive can make decisions via Executive Orders on the spot to counter such existing or perceived danger. However, such emergency powers are strictly limited in their scope and need to be sanctioned by the legislative body in due course.
Executive Orders
Executive Orders (EOs) were supposed to be used to smoothen out small irregularities, oversights or insufficient clarifications of law. They never were to usurp power from the legislature or intended to shortcut the due process of lawmaking. Everyone understood that and abided by that convention.
As of late, it appears, both legislative and executive bodies have had a change of mind on that. The former gives the impression that it simply cannot be expected to cope with all the verbiage contained in many novel draft laws and appears to be pre-occupied with exploiting any such for their own pecuniary interests. At the same time, the executive branch appears to be bent on stretching the powers available under its EOs far beyond those of the past equilibrium. The result is close to a state of pandemonium or utter chaos, commonly described as a lack of intelligible pattern or combination.
Chaos
A state of chaos exists when the powers that be can enact legally binding orders and regulations affecting the majority of the populace without any clear delimitation of any sort, neither in time nor place, for no reason of perceived threat and unlimited applicability.
In such a state of affairs, even with the best of intentions, if in doubt, many bureaucrats will interpret them in entirely unforeseen ways with unintended consequences. The Environmental Protection Agency and its rules and regulations are a good example of that. Originally created to protect the environment from undue consequences by some of mankind’s activities and products, it is now being used by the Executive to push demands well beyond any reason and unrelated to what may reasonably be considered as “environmental protection.”
“Environmental Protection”
“Environmental Protection” is the new catch-all phrase that appears to enable the executive branches of various levels of government in the western world to do anything they ever dreamed of. Scientific understanding of cause and effect or of theories and facts has become superfluous. The true cause(s) of any observed environmental problems may not even register. For example, when invasive (and destructive) species enter the world’s largest freshwater system, stretching from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, there is little hoopla. In contrast, if a student comes up with a theory (perhaps even a computer model) of some crazy idea on how such could be “explained” by “climate change” it’s plastered all over the media.
Of course, under the aforementioned new EO, anything not expressly named as “environmentally friendly” may soon become outlawed. So, better buy your mouse traps now; they could disappear from your neighborhood store shelves anytime
