Commentary
In all discussions about the “transition” to a net-zero emission economy, it is often overlooked that the most important transition is the transition from democratic capitalism to feudal serfdom.
This is the conclusion of American demographer and “blue-collar Democrat” Joel Kotkin. He emphasized that the well-meaning green policy, which appears to be adopted in the West, costs enormous costs to workers and the middle class.
As Kotkin wrote in “Spike” earlier this year, “extreme climate measures have caused the loss of traditional blue-collar jobs in manufacturing, construction and energy, while other environmental regulations have reduced home prices. I pushed it up. “
Kotkin’s dissertation states that the West is on the road to a surf dam. Rather than maintaining a capitalist society in which the middle class of large wealth ownership underpins a stable democratic system, we are becoming a stratified feudal society.
Ownership of homes and small businesses is declining, especially among young and non-wealthy people, and a group of technocratic elites have established themselves as permanent rulers of administrative state equipment and businesses. The oligarchy has come to dominate both the economy and the wider society.
This transition has been happening for some time, but has been accelerated by the blockade inspired by COVID-19 and the enthusiasm of the Western government to unknowingly adopt a net zero emission target.
Both serve as an offensive form of reverse Robin Hood’s asset stripping, robbing the poor and giving them to the rich.
Australia is now officially committed to zero emissions by the 2050 target.
But beyond the slogan of “technology, not tax,” Australians don’t know how the government plans to achieve its newly discovered ambitions.
In contrast, HM Treasury recently released a Net Zero Review Report (pdfIt provides details on how the UK Government expects to reach Net Zero.
The report contains surprisingly honest approval from the bureaucracy. “The costs and benefits of moving to a net-zero economy will ultimately be passed on to households through a variety of channels.”
It contains useful charts that show that the cost of Net Zero always costs the household, that is, everyday moms, dads, and workers, regardless of specific policies or mechanisms.
This insight is obvious to many, but it is too obfuscated.
The slogan “technology, not tax” is not only meaningless, but also deceptive. The scope of the taxpayer-funded scheme means higher taxes. Subsidizing certain types of energy, electric vehicles, or solar panels means higher taxes. Requiring companies to adopt technology does not otherwise mean higher prices or fewer options, but effectively stealth taxation.
The report also states that “high-income households emit about three times as much carbon as low-income households.”
However, in response to all calls for high-income earners to have a “fair tax burden,” the political left does not seem to require them to reduce emissions fairly.
In fact, “taking action against climate change” often means robbing low-income households of jobs, cars, electricity, food and hobbies.
The British Telegraph, which reports on the Johnson government’s plans to reach Net Zero, says lenders may be forced to comply with energy efficiency certification goals before offering mortgages.
“This could mean a more expensive mortgage for poorly performing homes to facilitate the adoption of measures such as wall and roof insulation.” Report said.. “But after the failure of the Green Homes Grant last year, the government did not provide additional measures to support energy efficiency measures for homeowners.”
Translation: To achieve Net Zero, mortgages need to be out of the reach of working-class families unless they “upgrade” their homes to reduce their carbon intensity. And the government isn’t crazy about providing support for such upgrades.
This is the kind of policy that is ultimately required in Australia. Many homes and old apartments are poorly insulated and, in the minds of climate enthusiasts, require excessive heating in the winter and excessive cooling in the summer, increasing carbon dioxide emissions.
The effects are harmful and regressive. The poorest households will face the choice of paying more for their home or being criticized by the lessor class.
Part of the political left, Australia’s emission reduction efforts so far have been essentially achieved by bribeing farmers not to develop land, but much larger bats to reach net zero. Point out that it will be necessary.
That’s true. And the UK shows exactly what this means.
Home ownership is only available to those who can purchase certain types of technology. Car ownership is only available to those who can buy an expensive electric car. Electricity will be more expensive and gas may be banned.
As Carlos Tavares, head of car maker Stellantis, recently said, this will radically change the West.
“I can’t imagine a democratic society without freedom of movement just for the wealthy. [to own cars] And everything else will use public transport, “he said.
Kotokin’s forecasts are currently being executed in real time. He is one of the few disillusioned leftists who understands that when the biggest companies, banks, financial firms and tech companies, along with the government, are in line with policies that voters never agreed to, it’s not good for workers and democracy. Is one of them.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
follow
Cian Hussey is a Research Associate at the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, Australia. His work focuses on the impact of bureaucratic formalism on SMEs and the broader economy.