NYT Reporter: Give Carbon Credits to People Who Only Have One Kid

I don’t know if you saw the premier last night of Phelim McAleer’s Not Evil Just Wrong. Unfortunately, McAleer’s site was attacked so I can’t provide a link. Click here for an interesting interview with McAleer. He made the point that the environmentalists don’t really care for human beings. As if we’re a cancer on the world that needs to be eradicated.

The New York Times environmental reporter, Andrew Revkin, only supports that contention. CNS News reports:

At the event, Revkin said: “Well, some of the people have recently proposed: Well, should there be carbon credits for a family planning program in Africa let’s say? Should that be monetized as a part of something that, you know, if you, if you can measurably somehow divert fertility rate, say toward an accelerating decline in a place with a high fertility rate, shouldn’t there be a carbon value to that? 

“And I have even proposed recently, I can’t remember if it’s in the blog, but just think about this: Should–probably the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it’s having fewer kids, having fewer children,” said Revkin.
 
“So should there be, eventually you get, should you get credit–If we’re going to become carbon-centric–for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three,” said Revkin. ”And obviously it’s just a thought experiment, but it raises some interesting questions about all this.”

Mr. Revkin isn’t the only environmentalist to float such an idea. Don’t forget Obama’s science czar John Holdren. He thought it would be a good idea for the FCC to force broadcasters to air environment advocacy ads such as Zero Population Growth.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 19th, 2009 at 11:25 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.