Drought climate change global warming

They tax your house. They tax your car. They tax your income. They even tax you when you die.

And now they want to tax you for having children.

Global-warming alarmists are floating the idea of a “carbon tax” on children as they pursue a strategy of “population engineering.”

Such an Orwellian plan is supposedly necessary to stop carbon emissions. Professor Travis Rieder of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics argues richer nations should remove tax breaks for parents and penalize them with a progressive income tax.

NPR calls it a “carbon tax, on kids.”

The policy would be part of the transition toward what Rieder calls a “small family ethic.”

Along with Colin Hickey and Jake Earl of Georgetown University, Rieder outlined his proposed program in a paper titled “Population Engineering and the Fight against Climate Change” in the journal Social Theory and Practice.

The authors argue there should be a “global policy response to the threat of dangerous climate change” that must incorporate “population engineering,” the “intentional manipulation of the size and structure of human populations.”

The paper outlines a “progressive, global fertility-reduction strategy” that would explicitly target wealthier nations and individuals.

It states:

“[T]he greater would-be procreator’s wealth, the more appropriate it will be to target that person with interventions to the right on the coercion spectrum. This is justifiable not only pragmatically but also morally: since wealth is a fairly reliable proxy for individuals GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions, and so for carbon legacy, it is morally justifiable to exert greater pressure on wealthy people’s procreative behaviors. Greater contributions to the dangers of global warming justify stronger fertility-reducing interventions. This principle supports our view that more effort should be directed toward reducing fertility in developed nations than in developing nations, since developed nations will emit more GHGs in the near term.”

Rieder isn’t alone in arguing for fewer children as a response to global warming. As chronicled by NPR, college students are being heavily pushed to consider not having children as a form of environmental activism. And a group of women have formed Conceivable Future, which claims “the climate crisis is a reproductive crisis.”

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Environmental and Public Works Committee, slammed the plan as “sad and ridiculous” but said he is not surprised.

“It exposes a dark underpinning of the global warming movement, which is inherently anti-human,” Inhofe told WND. “This is why, as chairman of the EPW Committee, I am constantly pressing climate extremists – including those inside this administration – on how they intend to get the carbon reduction emissions they are advocating for, because while they are targeting fossil fuels now, that will not ever meet their objective to control climate cycles and it will take even more extreme measures.”

Inhofe, author of “The Greatest Hoax: How The Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future,” said calls for “population engineering” were inherently anti-children.

“In 2007, Dr. Russell Moore, who is now the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Convention, highlighted this issue, which clearly still rings true today,” Inhofe told WND. “Dr. Moore said, ‘Many proposals of global warming activists – population control, for instance – are in direct contradiction of a Scripture that celebrates the blessing of children. Scripture also ordains and yet limits the scope of government power in such a way that Christians ought to be rightly suspicious of global bureaucratic structures, even when they promised to save the world.'”

Inhofe dismissed concerns a “carbon tax” on children was imminent, calling it “DOA in Congress.” But he warned conservatives must not be complacent.

“Ideas rejected by Congress are where agency bureaucrats find inspiration,” he said. “The Obama administration has worked hard trying to implement ideas Congress has rejected through regulations, such as the latest WOTUS (waters of the United States) rule that expands the federal government’s control of private property, and the Clean Power Plan, which some have labeled backdoor cap-and-trade because of its effort to control energy generation and restrict access to energy.

“On the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton has called the Clean Power Plan a ‘crucial tool’ and has promised to make it a ‘top priority’ in her administration to see it implemented, despite the fact that the Supreme Court has stayed the rule and that a majority in Congress and 150 entities, to include 27 states, 24 trade associations, 37 rural electric co-ops and three labor unions, do not support it and are even questioning its legality.”

It’s the greatest deception ever perpetuated against the American people. It’s the lie used to justify your enslavement. And the truth has been revealed at last. “The Greatest Hoax” by Sen. James Inhofe. Available now at the WND Superstore.

Marc Fitch, a WND contributor and the author of “Shmexperts: How Ideology and Power Politics Are Disguised As Science,” scoffed at these “climate experts” and their supposed expert opinions.

“This is reminiscent of the meteorologist who cried and said he was considering getting a vasectomy because of the climate change report released by the IPCC,” said Fitch. “To him and NPR and all those who would actually consider this sound advice, I say good, please don’t reproduce. It’s bad enough that we have people this desperate, gullible and willing to believe anything the government tells them. Why have more through them procreating?”

Fitch argues the anti-human orientation of environmentalism is fundamentally wrong when it comes to how the species solves problems.


If global warming is such an existential threat to humanity, why would we want [fewer] people?” he asked. “Survival of the human race depends on having people who can adapt, change, work, fix things, etc. The left is constantly drumming up reasons for people not to have children going back to Thomas Malthus’ theory that the world can only sustain a limited number of people due to a finite supply of resources. For a while, it was believed that the world would run out of food, like Paul Ehrlich’s assertion in the Population Bomb. It was believed that we would run out of oil. All of these were excuses for people to procreate less and use less and funnel money to the government to save us. None of it panned out. It still hasn’t.”

Fitch also said real human suffering resulted as a promotion of these ideas throughout the world.

“Let us not forget the horrendous one-child policy instituted in China due to fears of population growth and the forced sterilization of men and women in India for the very same reason,” he warned. “The Population Bomb idea never accounted for technology and human innovation. The results were horrific practices, government abuse of power, and enormous violations of people’s rights in the very same developing countries that global warming activists hope to help so much.”

Ultimately, Fitch said “global warming” is simply a rationalization for expanding government power.

“Global warming is just another excuse for the left to advocate for less family, less population and to isolate themselves at the top of the social food chain,” he said.

Brian Sussman, a meteorologist, talk-show host and author of “Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes The Global Warming Scam” and “Eco-Tyranny: How The Left’s Green Agenda Will Dismantle America,” says there is a deeper problem. He argues climate activists are simply assuming their theory is correct without having the evidence to prove it.

“The scientific method has been turned on its head by the eco-activists,” Sussman told WND. “No longer is it about developing a hypothesis and attempting to shoot holes in it to therefore disprove it. Now it’s state a hypothesis (anthropogenic greenhouse gases are responsible for global warming) and conduct so-called research to support the stated hypothesis. In the process, they skew data (temperature readings) and purposefully adjust computer models to assure predicted outcomes. And they deem this responsible behavior.”

Sussman argued “population engineering” isn’t a reluctant response to a climate crisis, but an inevitable outgrowth of environmentalism.

“At the heart of the environmental movement is a ghoulish quest to reduce the planet’s population,” he alleged. “When asked, eco-activists will admit abortion is a part of their solution, but a campaign to encourage women to have fewer children is also required. However, when caught in a candid moment, these eco-activists will also admit that famine, disease, or even casualties of war are less favorable alternatives that could complete their objective. This is because the committed activists believe the current population of the Earth is three times greater than what is sustainable.”

Fitch said one of the biggest problems with Rieder’s plan of reducing birthrates is the collapsing fertility rate that already exists in developed countries.

“Europe, Russia and Japan and seeing birth rates plummet to the point where they may hit a death spiral,” he said. “In Japan, they sell more adult diapers than they do baby diapers because the birth rates have gone down. In America, the traditional middle-class citizens have been having far fewer kids. What keeps America’s population running is the influx of immigrants from poorer countries who tend to have more children, while the affluent have less.”

However, one of the footnotes in “Population Engineering and the Fight against Climate Change” seems to meet this objection. It suggests a “global immigration scheme that allows younger people from developing nations to move to developed nations could also reduce any economic drag caused by reduced fertility.”

Of course, this would also lead to the wholesale transformation or de facto abolition of developed nations as they are flooded by younger people from the developing world.

Ultimately, Inhofe says what is really at stake is nothing less than freedom itself.

“MIT Climate Scientist Richard Linden said it best: ‘Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat’s dream; if you control carbon you control life,'” Inhofe told WND. “The global warming movement is about control – controlling our resources, controlling standards of living and controlling the right to exist. Right now, their primary focus is on controlling energy, the lifeblood of the modern world. We are seeing this with the Clean Power Plan, which will cost our economy $292 billion, increase electricity prices across the nation by double digits, and rob Americans of well-paying jobs and future economic growth.”

And the greatest victims, said Inhofe, are the minority populations liberals claim to defend.

“This plan will give the federal government power to basically restructure our entire energy grid, with the goal of shifting it towards renewables that are less dependable and exponentially more costly, even when subsidized by taxpayer dollars,” the senator said. “The poor and minority populations who spend the largest portion of their expendable income on energy bills stand to lose the most. Harry Alford, president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, highlighted before the EPW Committee this summer, the president’s climate policies will result in a cumulative job loss of 7 million for blacks and nearly 12 million for Hispanics by 2035.”

Sussman argues only self-education can turn back the tide and prevent some of the more nightmarish policies from being implemented.


“Self-education is a must, including reading books like ‘Climategate’ and ‘Eco-Tyranny’ in which I lay out not just the facts but the agenda,” he said. “Our children are being force-fed a dangerous diet of human-caused global warming in almost every class they take beginning in kindergarten. We must be properly armed to confront – and defeat – this enemy within.”

It’s the greatest deception ever perpetuated against the American people. It’s the lie used to justify your enslavement. And the truth has been revealed at last. “The Greatest Hoax” by Sen. James Inhofe. Available now at the WND Superstore.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.