I spoke at a conference this week where we started with some climate change fanatic from the IEA then followed up with a busybody from the egregious WWF — so, of course, in my bit on commodities (the ostensible purpose of the event!), I couldn't resist saying that inhibitions to supply included:
"...anthrophobic, anticapitalist environmentalism, whether in the form of cuddly panda pressure groups or the compulsory purchase of the Green indulgences which masquerade as carbon permits..."
and added something about,
"...not wanting to give any credence whatsoever to the Peak Oilers' and Climate Catastrophists' dismal Malthusianism by claiming that mineral and energy resources are in any meaningful sense 'finite'...."
At the end, in the Q&A, the climate change hack immediately grabbed the microphone and demanded of me:
"Did you say 'dismal science'?!? Do you just not understand the science or are you just annoyed that your precious commodities will not do well if we act to cut emissions?"
So, I replied:
"Well thank you for the slur on my intellect, professor, but, actually the science is a good deal more controversial than is suggested by the propaganda put out by you and the rest of the One World socialists."
"And as for commodities, it actually suits me professionally if you succeed, because you will artificially heighten their scarcity and they will perform well — and certainly better than equities or bonds. My company will do well and I will probably get a bigger bonus with which to buy Tony Blair's ludicrous personal carbon permits when they're issued.."
He didn't have a lot to say to that! PS. For a priceless spoof on the sanctimony and addled-headedness involved in all this, see this link (thank you, JE)
